Tag Archives: civil order

A Loss of Ultimate Purpose

Posted on by

The idea of individualism has been an emotional force in the American experience. Indeed, respect for independence and individualism has been a source of honor and pride in the American mind.

Yet, there has been an obvious divergence between the vibrant and spontaneous civic life that characterized much of the early American story, and, at the same time, a record of violence and brutality revealing an arrogance that defied accountability.

Who are we, really? Who do we want to be?

Extremely anti-social behavior will evoke revulsion in most of us. But, historically, the dark side of individualistic egoism has been socially acceptable, even conspicuous, in racist attitudes and practices toward American Indians and African-Americans. And, we have an unfortunate legacy of gang violence, accentuated by the Mafia, drugs, and prostitution.

The destruction we are seeing today goes far deeper, however. We have witnessed a profound deterioration of moral character and social responsibility in recent years, impacting society at every level.

We live in a time of extremes. Mass murder and sexual crimes are proliferating on an appalling scale. Prior to 1960 there were apparently no more than 3 instances of mass murder in the United States per decade.

Definitions have changed, but so far in 2015 I count 42 instances in which 4 or more people died during single events (shootertracker.com). Many more were injured in 353 shootings this year where less than 4 people died.

This is but one example of a profound deterioration we can see all around us in attitudes toward honesty, trustworthiness, and responsibility.

The degradation of the social order has been a gradual and complicated process. But in my view a significant factor has been a lack of effective parenting. Children have been growing up without civilized values or emotional grounding.

The growing loss of moral responsibility even among older adults is especially disturbing.

And, it does not stop there. Institutions we have depended upon are facing financial bankruptcy; systems are breaking down; people are losing their grip.

How is it that we have so completely lost our way, our sense of purpose, our understanding of the integrity of our place in the world? The answer is not simple, but there has surely been a shift in attitudes. America has seen the loss of a once dynamic and thriving civil society, followed by the debasement of social discourse in the face of overwhelming materialism.

Clearly, the individualism that requires mutual respect and embraces civic responsibility will remain ever vulnerable to the dishonor of undisciplined individuals who lose their moral compass.

If Americans wish to regain a civil society in which we engage in meaningful discourse and join one another to resolve problems, we will need to step aside from unproductive bickering, extricate ourselves from the wreckage, and face the complex of dangers that now confront us.

Some have suggested we have inherited attitudes leading to fragmentation in the way we see and understand the world. Certainly early American settlers were influenced by the loss of religious and cultural roots, the dangers of frontier life, and the nomadic and transient qualities of American life generally.

But, the debasement of the social order we are seeing now is a recent development. America has, most certainly, not always been the way we see it now.

A healthy nation depends on an engaged and upbeat civil society. But, civic activities have nearly vanished from community life. Instead we have witnessed a steady erosion of values, the loss of civility, and accelerating disorder.

We now find ourselves at a critical turning point, confronted by the practical consequences of generalized anger and, at times, the emotional rejection of any perceived restraint. Most importantly, we have lost a sense of ultimate purpose – and thus the conceptual framework upon which rational judgment depends.

All this has made us vulnerable both to our own vices and to the predatory interests and manipulative power of institutions that know our weaknesses.

I will enlarge on these thoughts in the new year with observations from the early American chronicler Alexis de Tocqueville, historian Niall Ferguson, and the iconic conservative philosopher, Richard M. Weaver.

I will be taking a short break, and I wish you all a happy, peaceful, and reflective holiday season. We have a lot to think about. I hope to post here again on January 1.

Tom

Freedom and Limitation

Posted on by

Questions about the meaning of freedom have always been with us. But, we often seem determined to seek absolute freedom despite all practical limitations. In the coming weeks we will consider our ability to find inner freedom and keep a positive attitude despite constraining circumstances.

In considering the limitations we experience in life, I will refer the implications of religious faith to individual judgment. Belief in an all-knowing God imposes constraints on our decisions and behavior, while freeing the heart and mind in entirely transcendent ways.

Here we will focus instead on the spirit of freedom for religious and non-religious readers alike, as we engage (and potentially prevail over) the limitations in our personal, social, and physical lives.

Our interaction with nature is of particular significance because our future depends on it. This planet is our home, yet we sometimes seem to doubt our responsibility for it.

For several hundred years scientists, philosophers, and politicians have expected that nature could and would come entirely under human control. Human beings do have a unique capacity to manipulate nature. But, as science has begun to understand the balance and complexity of natural systems, it has become clear that nature must be respected and sustained to ensure the survival of life on earth.

Setting aside the controversy surrounding climate change for the moment, the idea that nature has limits when sufficiently disrupted seems to make sense.

When I was a child there were two billion people alive on this planet. Now, having recently reached retirement age, the number is seven billion and growing rapidly. This has taken place in a single lifetime. My lifetime.

I cannot see how seven billion human beings, along with a massive agricultural and industrial footprint, could fail to impose a strain on the capacity of nature to provide the clean water and breathable air that we all depend on.

I believe this question is worth thinking about. Yet, the suggestion that absolute freedom has collided with limits in the natural world seems to cause a violently negative reaction.

What is this about?

If freedom is seen to be threatened by science, this would be no small matter. And so a disagreement that appeared at first to simply raise questions as to material fact has instead descended into bitter accusations of conspiracy, treason, and dishonor.

Am I wrong to think that this reaction is about more than climate change? The emotional climate suggests that freedom itself must be under attack.

We are confronted today by many growing threats to freedom: religious and political extremism, rising food prices, the loss of privacy, violence on our streets, aging infrastructure, conflicts over land and water rights, exponential population growth, insolvent financial institutions, and massively indebted governments.

Shall I go on? It gets to be crazy-making, you know?

Emotion coalesces into a rage focused on those who may have effectively driven us off a cliff. Who is responsible for all this, we ask? Bankers? Scientists? Politicians? Are these not people who are supposed to know what they are doing?

Whether it is the limits to nature that are in question or the shock of a faltering social and economic order, clearly the cherished expectations of ultimate human prosperity are no longer assured.

The prospects for peace do not look so great either.

We are confronted by numerous crises of major proportions. It is a time for each of us to become open to new conditions, new questions, and new ways of thinking. We owe it to ourselves to keep our wits about us.

Americans are capable, imaginative, constructive. Understanding freedom in a way that transcends human limitations has become very important.

We must commit ourselves to the independent investigation of truth, and not allow ourselves to be led mindlessly by others. We each have the capacity to think for ourselves.

The future and the responsibility are ours to claim.

Tom

Next week: Loss of Ultimate Purpose

A Conflicted Legacy

Posted on by

The emergence of modern civilization from philosophical roots in Europe generated ideas and social ferment that influenced the early American identity profoundly.

The new ethos was grounded in the belief that a rational humanity, freed to recreate the world through the power of reason, must be capable of discovering effectual truth. And, as noted in the previous post, this belief was accompanied by the expectation that human beings would soon master nature.

From these convictions there arose a faith that we would, in the words of philosopher and political scientist Michael Allen Gillespie, ultimately secure “universal freedom, general prosperity, and perpetual peace.”

It was under this dynamic influence that the American identity began to take shape.

The idea of a promising future for humankind was powerful, inspiring confidence in the potential to free ourselves from the shackles of an oppressive past. And, for the thousands of European immigrants disembarking in the New World, a working knowledge of philosophy was not required.

Everyone knew what America represented, and the promise, however primal and unformed it might be, came to root itself deeply in the emerging American identity.

Europeans were fascinated by the self-assured confidence of the American character, and Americans were energized by their freedom from the fetters of European cultures, institutions, and domineering governments.

There were ample crises and controversies, of course, to arouse and vitalize the new nation as it struggled to find its feet. We did not agree on much. The country was saddled with the unfinished business of its European past: the scar of slavery, the tensions between moneyed and working classes, and the prejudices of religion, race, and nationality.

Yet, a potent hopefulness prevailed as wave after wave of new arrivals powered the growth of a seemingly insatiable industrial economy. The ideas continued to generate a confident vision on both sides of the Atlantic throughout the nineteenth century.

But then things started to go terribly wrong.

Professor Gillespie has described the shock of events in the twentieth century:

“The view of history as progress was severely shaken by the cataclysmic events of the first half of the twentieth century, the World Wars, the Great Depression, the rise of totalitarianism, and the Holocaust. What had gone wrong? Modernity, which had seemed on the verge of providing universal security, liberating human beings from all forms of oppression, and producing an unprecedented human thriving, had in fact ended in a barbarism almost unknown in previous human experience.

“The tools that had been universally regarded as the source of human flourishing had been the source of unparalleled human destruction. And finally, the politics of human liberation had proved to be the means to human enslavement and degradation. The horror evoked by these cataclysmic events was so overwhelming that it called into question not merely the idea of progress and enlightenment but also the idea of modernity and the conception of Western civilization itself.”

We have admired the generation of Americans who prevailed during the Great Depression and World War II. We like to call them “The Greatest Generation.” They did not forget. They remained proud and frugal for the rest of their lives, though many of their children failed to understand.

They are mostly gone now. How many of us today know what they knew? …We, who have drowned ourselves in materialism purchased with debt.

What happened?

I believe we have tried to walk away from the past with little understanding of what had happened. Both the fear of debt and the horrifying perversity of the war have been largely repressed and lost to memory.

The practical limits of freedom in a complex world have started to close in on our lives, unforgiving in the absence of rational judgment and moral responsibility.

Are we ready to reflect on where we have come from and to confront the present confluence of crises with our eyes wide open?

Tom

Next week: The Will to Freedom

Grit and Grace

Posted on by

Americans today face a critical moment in time, arguably as profound as any in our history. Freedom of opportunity, social justice, and the preservation of our ability to seek personal goals are all at stake. The character of the nation appears to be in question. Our sense of identity as a people has been shaken.

We are experiencing the present adversity as an American crisis, and it is. But it is taking place in the context of a great turning point in the human story, a period of time when an unprecedented number of monumental crises are converging across the globe.  Our own crisis is inextricably intertwined with the affairs of the world.

Never has there been a greater need for the stability of the American vision.

I have proposed a simple, yet demanding course of constructive action that can lead toward agreement concerning shared values and principles. If we have the will, it can also provide a platform for seeking a shared vision of the future, and drafting a strategy for getting ourselves there.

This will be extremely difficult for Americans to carry off. But, I do not believe we have a choice. Without a willingness to engage with one another in this a way, I do not expect this nation to survive as a democratic republic.

We must find our way with both grit and grace, navigating through complex, interacting crises. We face a transition that can be expected to dominate the course of the 21st century.

The outcome will depend on our character as a people, and our understanding of the fundamental structural change in social, economic, and environmental realities that will confront us each step of the way.

Necessity presents us with stark, uncomfortable choices. We can give free reign to anger and disillusionment, allowing ourselves to be dragged down to a demoralized helplessness. Or we can determine to stand firmly together as a people, rising above our differences to meet the challenges that confront us.

Are we prepared to preserve core values, even as we forge a genuinely American response to the evolving conditions of an unexpected and unprecedented series of crises?

Will we have the vision, courage, and fortitude to commit ourselves to principled means and constructive action?

I will not offer a political philosophy, nor will I speak of ultimate goals. Fundamental values and a shared purpose must be determined by the American people. Rather, I will propose the means for doing this.

Both this blog and the forthcoming book identify principles I consider necessary for undertaking this endeavor, and suggest the qualities of character, attitude, and responsibility that can bring us through a profound turning point in our national experience.

I ask that we turn away from the dishonesty and deceit of partisan politics to address the needs and problems in our local communities.

A practical approach is offered that transcends religious, philosophical, and partisan views. It leverages the strength of local communities willing to foster genuine unity while capitalizing on their diversity.

I leave the ultimate vision of the future to you: the American people.

In addressing the epic challenges confronting us in the coming years, it will be necessary to manage our relationships and responsibilities with honesty and integrity. These virtues must be sought determinedly and without faltering, however dark the prospect.

I ask Americans to rise above our differences in the conviction that however immense the tests we face, however the world changes around us, however diverse our personal circumstances, this nation must not be permitted to abandon its founding vision and ultimate purpose.

Tom

A note to regular readers: If you wish to offer your encouragement, you may do so by clicking on the “Follow” button on the right side of the page. When it comes time to publish, numbers will make a difference.

Freedom and Stability in Governance

Posted on by

The structure of the Constitution is simple yet profound. It carefully restrains the passions of factionalism, however intense, from imposing destructively on either minority or majority. It limits the potential for regional conflict and ensures the strength to confront external threats.

It is the antagonistic divisiveness current among Americans that concerns us here.

“Give all the power to the many,” wrote Alexander Hamilton, “they will oppress the few. Give all the power to the few, they will oppress the many.”

To understand how and why we depend on the Constitution as we navigate through crises, it will be useful to consider both the carefully reasoned manner in which it was conceived and the negative reaction that it at first inspired.

The founders made a great effort to see into the future.

It can be instructive to review some of the numerous essays and polemics that were published in the American colonies during the period when the proposed document was being considered for ratification. Among these, a series of 85 commentaries was published in 1787 and 1788 for the purpose of supporting ratification by three members of the Constitutional Convention.

The three writers, who originally shared the pseudonym, “Publius”, were Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison. Later consolidated into a single volume as The Federalist, the assembled papers were said by Thomas Jefferson, another participant at the Convention, to be “the best commentary on the principles of government, which ever was written,” a view many legal scholars agree with today.

The Federalist remains an authoritative text often cited in major court cases and has appeared in the debates surrounding virtually every constitutional crisis. Another collection entitled The Anti-Federalist Papers, edited by Ralph Ketcham, is also easily available.

Readers are encouraged to investigate the issues reflected in the debate that led to ratification.

In the end, the outcome turned out not to be in question except in New York, where the State Constitutional Convention passed it by only three votes. But, the debates remain instructive and bear a strong similarity to many of those we find ourselves engaged in today.

As an example, I refer you here to the way the framers of the Constitution addressed an inevitable challenge to both fundamental freedoms and effective governance.

In The Federalist, Number 10, James Madison argues that there is no more important purpose in structuring a sound government than that of limiting the “violence” of factionalism.

Responding to the issues prevalent in the colonies immediately following the Revolutionary War, Madison writes that: “Complaints are everywhere heard…, that our governments are too unstable; that the public good is disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties; and that measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice, and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority.”

Does this not sound familiar to the citizen of today?

Madison continues:

“As long as the reason of man continues fallible, and he is at liberty to exercise it, different opinions will be formed. As long as the connection subsists between his reason and his self-love, his opinions and his passions will have a reciprocal influence on each other; and the former will be objects to which the latter will attach themselves.

“The latent causes of faction are thus sown in the nature of man; and we see them everywhere brought into different degrees of activity, according to the different circumstances of civil society…. So strong is this propensity of mankind, to fall into mutual animosities, that where no substantial occasion presents itself, the most frivolous and fanciful distinctions have been sufficient to kindle their unfriendly passions, and to excite their most violent conflicts.

“But the most common and durable source of factions, has been the various and unequal distribution of property. Those who hold and those who are without property have ever formed distinct interests in society. Those who are creditors, and those who are debtors, fall under a like discrimination. A landed interest, a manufacturing interest, a mercantile interest, a monied interest, with many lesser interests, grow up of necessity in civilized nations, and divide them into different classes, actuated by different sentiments and views.

“The regulation of these various and interfering interests forms the principal task of modern legislation, and involves the spirit of party and faction in the necessary and ordinary operations of government….

“The inference to which we are brought,” Madison concludes, “is that the causes of faction cannot be removed; and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its effects.”

Tom

Next week: A different kind of nation

Freedom and Stability: A Careful Balance

Posted on by

We are confronted today with increasing danger and instability. In rebuilding the dynamic balance between freedom and stability in the United States, there are many negative forces and potential threats to be acknowledged.

We must act carefully and not throw away our inheritance.

Americans have been provided with a simple and carefully considered model for governance that has protected us from most forms of excess for 200 years.

Our politicians have complicated things, but the basic principles are plain and straightforward. Where partisanship or bad judgment have corrupted good governance, the unique structure of our republican form of government has always guided the return to reason, however tough the medicine or jarring the upheaval.

Sometimes all we see are the threats to principle or the dysfunction of institutions. But the constitutional structure we have inherited has a durable balance that will always recover.

To correct serious problems such as we see today, it will be necessary to keep our purpose in perspective. And surely our immediate purpose includes the safety of our families and the ability to address pressing material problems in cooperation with our neighbors.

A balance is necessary between local and national. We have allowed our personal responsibility to slide and permitted distortions to develop.

Ours is a nation of both principles and laws. This provides a degree of stability and allows us to listen to one another respectfully – if we so chose.

The Constitution provides us with a structure within which to manage our affairs and restrain abusive behaviors.  It was not intended to outlaw foolishness, and it has not. Rather it was designed to permit a nation to emerge and prosper while protecting minorities from the majority, the majority from minorities, and the government from itself.

The framers of the Constitution recognized that our liberties can only be defended by confronting the natural human propensity to impose ourselves on one another whenever possible. Without some degree of federal power, they believed that the natural rancor of politics would lead to the oppression of minorities, wars between independent states, and vulnerability to external threats.

However, this centralized power must be constrained by a vigilant citizenry. We must take responsibility for making the structure work as it was intended. A balance must be ensured by citizens who understand the meaning and purpose of this unique form of governance.

If we seek to build a world where prosperity is possible, where our children can be safe and personal freedoms are respected, it will be necessary to first create a stable environment for addressing problems, resolving conflicts, and building effective institutions.

In my view, this can only be done in the context of organized, self-possessed and forward-looking local communities — our own communities.

Community is the seat of civilization, made genuine because it is personal. It is in our local communities that we engage one another face to face, cementing trust, tending to needs, learning patience and responsibility. Here it is among friends and neighbors that we can find the confidence to envision the future and look forward from the disorder of the present.

Our strength comes with diversity and our readiness to rise above our differences to build a vibrant, welcoming and free-spirited society. This is the essence of our heritage, our humanity, and the source of the nation’s greatness.

Trust and responsibility don’t just appear by good fortune. They are formed in the trials of necessity and hardship, and inspired by commitment and purpose.

Beyond the boundaries of family, community is that place where immediate needs present themselves and must be resolved. As government loses its capacity to manage, we will have no one to look to except ourselves.

Americans have abdicated personal responsibility for this aspect of civilized life for a long time, and we have done so at our peril.

It was not always this way. Prior to the American Revolution and for close to 100 years afterward Americans gravitated easily, even impulsively, toward decentralized local governance and an independent frame of mind.

They managed their own affairs in cooperation with their neighbors and accepted regional autonomy as a natural condition.

I believe the time has come to accept responsibility for what we have been given by those who came before us.

Tom

Next week: Freedom and Stability in Governance

A Disciplined Freedom

Posted on by

The future of the United States is rooted in a storied past. When the first European settlers came to North America and dispersed into the forests and across the open plains, they had only their own initiative, ingenuity, and self-reliance to depend upon. No one was there to counsel them about the requirements for survival.

The meaning of freedom and responsibility were determined by harsh realities. Intrepid settlers also relied on one another as neighbors, so long as each took responsibility for themselves. Self-reliance and the acceptance of personal responsibility lead to mutual respect, and ultimately to self-respect. Whining and complaint don’t fly, however tough the circumstances.

We now find ourselves coming full circle to a time when some of the requirements of the early American frontier may become necessary once again. The physical circumstances look different, but the challenges will increasingly resemble those of an earlier time – when we were forced to stand on our own feet, depending on inventiveness, cooperation, and reliability in the context of community.

Most of us have become accustomed to the culture of dependence that easy credit and a well-funded government have engendered. But, this cannot possibly continue. Government will rapidly lose its capacity to function in the coming years. A depressed and heavily indebted economy will not support the government services we are used to, and this is likely to be with us for a long time.

As the Government finds itself unable to deliver promised commitments without devaluing the currency, our standard of living will deteriorate significantly. We will be called upon to learn the lessons of self-reliance and social responsibility demonstrated by those earlier Americans in the past who taught us a wisdom borne of hardship and hard work.

The individualism encouraged in the past by the relative freedom of unlimited physical frontiers must now be disciplined and refocused: Disciplined by the necessity to maintain our balance as we navigate through multiple crises, and refocused by the need to develop practical responses to complex material problems.

Maintaining stability will become a major concern because without it we cannot keep our families safe, and because cooperation and constructive effort cannot take place in chaos.

Some argue that creative change is born of instability, because it overcomes natural resistance to changing outdated customs. While this may be true, I don’t think we need to go looking for instability. We are not going to be able to avoid it. Good ideas and promising endeavors will be both born and destroyed in the coming days. I fear there will be no absence of opportunity for injury and trauma to our families. The ground is shifting beneath our feet.

We will have to fight for stability to get it back. If we seek to build a world where prosperity is possible, where our children can be safe and personal freedoms are respected, it will be necessary to create a stable environment for addressing problems, resolving conflict, and building capacity.

What will matter first and foremost will be our ability to work together, rising above our differences to build the foundations for safe communities, food security, and a functioning local economy.

In the coming weeks we will be thinking about how the Constitution of the United States has made such a diverse, strong-willed and combative nation possible for 200 years, and then go on to consider the social history and ideas influencing our national character.

This will be important for two reasons: It will assist us to approach the present difficulties with a balanced historical perspective, and to focus our best thinking on seeking a future we can respect and feel good about.

What are the ultimate outcomes we wish to seek?

Tom Harriman

Next week: Freedom and Stability, Finding the Balance.

The Challenge We Must Rise To

Posted on by

Last week I introduced you to James Surowiecki’s observations regarding democratic decision-making in his book, The Wisdom of Crowds. Offering convincing evidence that wisdom can be found in large groups if we know how to look for it, Mr. Surowiecki challenges our understanding of democracy.

None of us would expect the citizens of a democratic republic to make objective decisions when they have individual interests at stake. However, he reports startling results when aggregating the thinking of unrelated groups of strangers.

Importantly, Mr. Surowiecki emphasizes the necessity for both diversity of viewpoints and independence in thinking.

I would suggest that wisdom can also be found more intentionally, and intelligently, when we are fully committed to seeking the greater good. And this is most effective when we are committed to the safety and well-being of our friends and neighbors.

Such commonality of intention has certain basic requirements of course. Local initiatives will always depend on shared purpose, and to a large extent on shared values. And, this can only happen when we rise above our differences to appreciate the diversity of our knowledge, our varied experience and unique ways of seeing things.

Unity cannot exist in a state of sameness. It only comes into being with the embrace of differences. Living with diversity presents us with the necessity for learning how to engage with one another in practical ways. Nothing will be possible otherwise.

In Chapter One, American Crucible, I quote Peggy Noonan’s heartfelt call to the American people in her little book, Patriotic Grace, What It Is and Why We Need It Now. In it she urges us to rise above our differences, however significant they may be, to reaffirm “what it is to be an American.”

Rarely has there been a time in the past of this extraordinary country when it has been more important to consider and to reaffirm what it is to be an American.

Peggy Noonan puts it to us like this:

“Politics is a great fight and must be a fight; that is its purpose. We are a great democratic republic, and we struggle with great questions. One group believes A must be law, the other Z. Each side must battle it through, and the answer will not always be in the middle. The answer is not always M.

“But we can approach things in a new way, see in a new way, speak in a new way. We can fight honorably and in good faith, while—and this is the hard one—both summoning and assuming good faith on the other side.

“To me it is not quite a matter of ‘rising above partisanship,’ though that can be a very good thing. It’s more a matter of remembering our responsibilities and reaffirming what it is to be an American.

“…And so I came to think this: What we need most right now, at this moment, is a kind of patriotic grace—a grace that takes the long view, apprehends the moment we are in, comes up with ways of dealing with it, and eschews the politically cheap and manipulative. That admits affection and respect. That encourages them. That acknowledges the small things that divide us are not worthy of the moment; that agrees that the things that can be done to ease the stresses we feel as a nation should be encouraged, while those that encourage our cohesion as a nation should be supported.

“I’ve come to think that this really is our Normandy Beach, …the key area in which we have to prevail if the whole enterprise is to succeed. The challenge we must rise to.”

Some readers will recoil from the suggestion that “small things… divide us.” Some feel strongly that very substantial thing divide us. I am quite sure that Peggy Noonan would not want to minimize the significance of our concerns.

But, she has a point. We can acknowledge the things that divide us, address them in a respectful manner, and unite to strengthen the nation to protect the civil order that allows us our freedoms. Or, we can let it all come to naught.

I never said it would be easy. I said we have no choice.

Tom

Next week: A Disciplined Freedom

Finding Our Strength

Posted on by

The choice is ours. We can acknowledge our differences, address one another with dignity, and unite in our communities to address local needs and resolve local problems. Or, we can accept a world of hostility, disorder, and ultimate collapse as our children’s inheritance – and let the vision and the treasure of the American idea slip away.

Some may say that it is too late. Or, that their principles are too important to be compromised.

I say that the United States was conceived in controversy and that the powerful vision of the founders came with recognition that strength in unity can only be founded upon diversity.

Indeed, it will be argued here that diversity is the foundation for strength, and that the United States Constitution is a visionary assertion of this belief. They gave us structure. It is our responsibility to give it character.

Given our great diversity, what exactly does it mean to be an American? The answer that we choose as a nation will determine the shape of our future. We will be returning to this question again and again throughout the forthcoming book.

We find ourselves confronted today by one of the great tests of history, a direct challenge to both the intent enshrined in the Constitution and the coherence of the American vision that has been gradually maturing for more than two hundred years.

Perhaps we have lost our way for periods of time, stumbled, gotten sloppy. But now it is time to pull together. And, in all practicality this can only take place in the context of our local communities – the home of democracy and seat of civil order.

In a free society, stability cannot be imposed from above. The kind of strength we seek is grounded in trust, and the dependability of personal relationships.

I am not writing about a “recovery” from crisis in the normal sense. Rather, I submit that we stand at the threshold of an unprecedented turning point, one that offers us a window of opportunity to reaffirm and assert our exceptional and multifaceted identity.

In considering our approach to new and unexpected challenges in a rapidly changing world, we are positioned to make positive changes, both pragmatic and ethical, that would have been impossible otherwise. I believe a creative process is now underway that would not otherwise have been possible.

A tough lesson like this can correct weaknesses and imbalances that have led to these crises, but success can only be built on the time-tested principles that have made America an attractive model for the world.

We will go on to consider the foresight of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 that led to the system of protections, the checks and balances that makes this nation what it is. First, however, let’s examine the reasons that diversity has ensured American strength – not as a nice idea, but as a pragmatic necessity.

When, as individuals or groups, we address a problem or plan a project, the more varied the perspective and experience that is brought to bear, the more creative and effective will be the solutions found. This is an irrefutable truism.

In many institutions, and particularly in government, people are often afflicted with a condition called ‘group-think’. Everyone thinks the same way and listens only to those they most respect or fear. Consequently, groups often ignore obvious fallacies and misperceptions. Not only that, they tend to scorn perceptive critics as trouble-makers.

Our resistance to accepting diversity is often based in our discomfort with those we perceive as “outsiders”, who look or think differently than we do, or who come from unfamiliar cultural backgrounds. Yet, differences constitute the essence of diversity, and they can sometimes stimulate our thinking in ways we can ill afford to live without.

Why are we afraid of new and different ways of thinking? No one is asking us to change our minds.

Aristotle said that “it is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.”

The opportunity to explore the world through the eyes of other people is a blessing and a gift. A life filled with diversity is an adventure that never stops giving.

Tom

Next week: Unexpected Wisdom

Good Neighbors Are Earned

Posted on by

Where to begin? If local communities are to serve as the foundation for healing the American spirit and reclaiming our sense of purpose, we must learn to make them strong – dependable, trustworthy, and resilient.

Many of us are not well acquainted with our immediate neighbors, much less those around the corner or down the road. If we want good people to depend on in a serious crisis, this has to change. Many problems are more easily resolved when we team up with others. Think food security, or friends we can trust when the banks close or the power goes out.

I have shared my concerns with you about the critical role of local communities. I have explained why I believe local communities and networks of communities will become the essential platform on which Americans reorganize themselves to identify common values, plan a common future, and forge a common purpose.

Building on the solid ground we foster in neighborly relationships, community is the only place in these extreme days where we have both the ability and the opportunity to control our destiny.

As each of us looks around and assesses our circumstances, how can we begin?

Those of you who are naturally outgoing will find this discussion simplistic. But for others the challenge of reaching out to strangers and proposing a common endeavor will be imposing.

There are several kinds of challenges to consider. These include: 1) getting acquainted with strangers and developing friendships, 2) explaining our motives honestly and our ideas effectively, 3) cooperation in addressing local needs, and 4) proposing more ambitious endeavors.

Community-wide efforts can include a wide array of possibilities. For example, these might include local security considerations, growing and preserving food, educating children, initiating small business enterprises, and troubleshooting technical problems that require creative thinking or specialized skills, such as electrical power, safe drinking water, and waste disposal.

All these possibilities can be placed on the table when we are first getting acquainted. Hearing a range of possible benefits for engaging in mutual assistance can jump-start resistant minds.

However, it is probably best not to try to fix all the ills of the world on the first visit. Unless you already know someone well, the first step will be to get acquainted and to find reasons to spend more time together. A warm, friendly first visit can be the basis for later, more substantive engagement.

Always begin interactions by inviting people to share their feelings and views before you do. This will provide you with a basis for effective engagement, and it will make them more receptive to you. Do not pry or press. But, if you can get another person talking, you will find them far more open to hearing from you.

Once new acquaintances begin to warm to you, invite them to think with you about ways the community can be improved. Invite ideas, and then suggest some of your own. If you find an opening, share your hope.

Try to avoid or downplay the more serious political or emotional issues, if possible, until you have secured a stronger positive connection.

If you meet unreceptive people, don’t push. Be friendly, stay in touch, and make yourself useful. As time passes, watch for ways to demonstrate the practical benefits of a mutually supportive community.

Soon we can begin to introduce people to each other. Small social gatherings can help people get acquainted. While remaining informal, we can introduce ideas by floating questions. What problems or unmet needs do we know of? Who has skills? What skills would be we like to learn? How can we assist one another?

As we come to know one another better, we can begin to discuss our willingness to rise above our differences when needs are great or the stakes are high.

First we are human, then we are neighbors, and, finally, we are Americans who care. As individuals we can be none of these things in isolation.

The future is of immense importance – but reality begins at home.

Tom

Next week: Finding our strengths.

The Forward Edge of History

Posted on by

The unprecedented vision that came into being with the birth of the United States is today impaired by increasingly bitter and antagonistic rhetoric that precludes dialog. If Americans care to participate in a constructive process leading to renewal, we must navigate carefully through the currents of instability.

Violence begets violence in a downward spiral, rhetorical or otherwise. Words can ignite fierce, uncontrollable fires.

When the financial world came unraveled in 2007-08, Americans discovered that startling failures of foresight, responsibility, and common sense involved the very people and institutions we most depended on.

We were stunned by the foolishness that came to light in the very places where we were most vulnerable. Suddenly we recognized a profound disregard for the interests of both citizens and nation – by the same institutions we had previously regarded as models of dependability.

In retrospect, however, we can see that this crisis had long been coming, and that it revealed far more than political and financial irresponsibility.

We have seen the broad social deterioration that comes with unethical behavior and the loss of principled values. Respected national leaders have stained themselves. We have even seen immoral and deeply hurtful actions committed by religious leaders and clergy, the supposed exemplars of integrity.

Where will it stop? In addition to the material damage done to our lives, the rampant failure of responsibility appearing at the core of our society is demoralizing. Indeed, it strikes at the foundations of civilization.

It is easy to get caught up in our feelings at a time like this. It will be necessary to modulate our speech and better manage our emotions if we wish to reaffirm the ultimate purpose of this great nation. Times of peril require that we communicate carefully and avoid contributing to inflamed passions, however offended we may be.

Hurled accusations and inflamed rhetoric make it impossible to hear potentially valid reasoning behind the anger.

The trouble with blame is, first, that it tends to be indiscriminate. It blinds us to the plural identities of those who disagree with us, or who have just made some bad mistakes. We can sometimes fail to see that we share similar values and commitments with those who anger us.

Secondly, blaming will block our ability to respond to looming perils that endanger us all. A fierce storm has come upon us. We need to take responsibility for addressing immediate circumstances.

Make no mistake: A great storm like this will alter everyone’s perspective. So, let’s start with priorities we know to be essential, to ensure the safety and security of our communities. We will build from there.

In so doing we will learn much of what the future will require of us. It is essential that we transcend personal fear, resisting its attendant passions, and learn to work with those around us. Otherwise it will be impossible to respond effectively to the complex challenges of a rapidly changing world.

Some of you have expressed serious doubts that this is possible.

I never said it would be easy; I said we have no choice. If we are unable to confront crises shoulder-to-shoulder as loyal countrymen, freedom will be lost in the chaos of a deepening storm.

It will be helpful if we can see the end in the beginning – the vision of a civil society where respectfulness, fairness, and moral responsibility prevail and freedom of expression is nurtured and defended.

This is a vision and purpose that might just be worth our learning to get along, even for the most doubtful among us. And, it is something we can work on in our own communities.

Patience, composure, steadfast determination, and, most of all, the American generosity of spirit are among the virtues that will be called upon again and again in this day.

We will not escape this great turning point in human affairs. It will inflict tests upon us whether or not we respond with dignity and compassion, whether or not we take our rightful places at the forward edge of history.

Tom

Next week: Where to begin.

A note to new readers: Several chapter drafts for the forthcoming book are posted on this site. See especially Chapter Six: The Ground of Freedom, and Chapter Nine: The Individual in Society.

Lessons From a Painful Past

Posted on by

The 20th Century brought an immense wealth of marvelous advances into the world – scientific, intellectual, cultural. Yet it was a century of appalling violence, the most destructive in all of human history. An estimated 167 million to 188 million people died at human hands.

The century that produced communism, facism, and nationalism also saw the invention of highly efficient weaponry, and a willingness to direct it against civilian populations on a massive scale.

Perhaps it would be wise for us to look at our current problems in historical context. Will we, as Americans still enjoying the relative isolation afforded by two great oceans, recognize how easy it is for terrible things to happen?

A balanced perspective would lend wisdom to our endeavors and offer important lessons. At the present historic turning point humankind can least afford to repeat the horrifying errors of the past. And how easy it would be to do.

In his 2006 book, The War of the World: Twentieth-Century Conflict and the Descent of the West, the historian Niall Ferguson, who I have introduced to you previously, wrote that “the hundred years after 1900 were without question the bloodiest century in modern history, far more violent in relative as well as absolute terms than any previous era. . . . There was not a single year before, between or after the world wars that did not see large-scale violence in one part of the world or another.”

I believe Niall Ferguson’s analysis is of value to us because he departs from the typical explanations blaming weaponry and fascist governments, as significant as these were, and instead identifies ethnic conflict, economic volatility, and declining empires as the true causes.

In short, he reminds us of our human vulnerability to emotional insecurity, fear, and tribalism.

The “confluence of crises” I am writing about involves elements of all these things, but also a range of newly emerging concerns that have become apparent more recently, and are related more or less to the material limits of population growth, environmental and resource sustainability, and the capability of technology to maintain critical systems or mitigate major problems.

In every case, regardless of the particular nature of oncoming crises, the challenges we face as individuals and families come into focus as we respond to immediate threats. And, as Dr. Ferguson points out, it is the overreaction of people under pressure that leads to the most terrible violence.

It is my view, as most readers know, that our local communities are the only place where we have the capability and reasonable hope of controlling our lives going forward.

The difference between a violent past and a civilized future will depend entirely on the manner in which we relate to one another, approach problems, and organize our local affairs. In a word, the distinction between past and future will be our attitude.

Community-building is the context in which we can best respond, creatively and constructively, to the degradation taking place around us. It can provide us with the means to build trust with friends and neighbors and to take responsibility for meeting local needs and addressing local problems.

Here it is that we can undertake to work together for the greater good as loyal compatriots. Here it is that the real needs of real lives can be identified and addressed.

And, it is in the process of problem-solving and working shoulder-to-shoulder that we can begin to know, understand, and influence one another.

We must be realistic. Great numbers of people remain under the influence of ingrained prejudices of ethnicity, gender, religion and class. This will only change as we rise above our differences to address the felt-needs we face together in a difficult world.

Patience and determination make many things possible, but necessity brings everything sharply into focus. Interpersonal alienation wanes as we identify common concerns and develop a deepening sense of unity around common purpose.

Tom

Next week: Seeing the end in the beginning

A note to readers: You may find related chapter drafts posted on this site of some interest. See especially Chapter Six: The Ground of Freedom, and Chapter Nine: The Individual in Society.