Individual, Community, and the State

For much of the nation’s first 100 years, Americans gave meaning to their values and expressed their creative energy in a diverse array of civic activity.  As we saw in the previous post, Americans overcame constraints to their freedom through their own inspiration and sense of community.

Today, action has been replaced by inaction.  A once spirited culture of engagement has been replaced by an increasingly self-centered attitude and the loss of initiative, cooperation, trust, and moral responsibility.

While it is easy the see how technology – the automobile, television, and internet – can limit as well as enhance human interaction, historian Niall Ferguson argues that it is “not technology, but the state – with its seductive promise of ‘security from the cradle to the grave’ – [which is] the real enemy of civil society.”

Ferguson cites the prophetic vision of Tocqueville, who we met in the previous blog post, when he imagined a future America in which the spirit of community has been co-opted by government:

“I see an innumerable crowd of like and equal men,” Tocqueville wrote in 1840, “who revolve on themselves without repose, procuring the small and vulgar pleasures with which they fill their souls.

“Each of them, withdrawn and apart, is like a stranger to the destiny of all the others: his children and his particular friends form the whole human species for him; as for dwelling with his fellow citizens, he is beside them, but he does not see them; he touches them and does not feel them; he exists only in himself and for himself alone….

“Above these an immense tutelary power is elevated, which alone takes charge of assuring their enjoyments and watching over their fate. It is absolute, detailed, regular, far-seeing, and mild.

“It would resemble paternal power if, like that, it had for its object to prepare men for manhood; but on the contrary, it seeks only to keep them fixed irrevocably in childhood….

“Thus, …the sovereign extends its arms over society as a whole; it covers its surface with a network of small, complicated, painstaking, uniform rules through which the most original minds and the most vigorous souls cannot clear a way to surpass the crowd; it does not break wills, but it softens them, bends them, and directs them; it rarely forces one to act, but it constantly opposes itself to one’s acting; it does not destroy, it prevents things from being born; it does not tyrannize, it hinders, compromises, enervates, extinguishes, dazes, and finally reduces each nation to being nothing more than a herd of timid and industrious animals of which the government is the shepherd.”

Elsewhere Tocqueville added an explicit warning:

“But what political power would ever be in a state to suffice for the innumerable multitude of small undertakings that American citizens execute every day with the aid of association?…

“The morality and intelligence of a democratic people would risk no fewer dangers than its business and industry if government came to take the place of associations everywhere.

“Sentiments and ideas renew themselves, the heart is enlarged, and the human mind is developed only by the reciprocal action of men upon one another.”

I do believe that government has had a part in the deadening of the American spirit.  But, I do not think we can attribute the present condition solely to government.

In my view, the degeneration of behavior and attitudes cannot be divorced from the paralyzing effect of corporate domination and the corrupting influence of mass culture and advertising.

I also believe the long slide toward alienation and apathy has come with our personal acquiescence.  For several generations Americans have gradually descended into a materialistic passivity and embraced an obsessive passion for entertainment and spectacle.

This is something we can only fault ourselves for accepting.

Our government began, after all, as a creature of our own invention.  And it is now served by people who have been subjected to the same degraded values and demoralized sense of responsibility as the rest of us.

Real change will depend on each of us – taking initiative as individual citizens, accepting responsibility for the well-being of our communities, and by renewing the foundations of society with civility, cooperation, and constructive action.

Tom

Coming posts:  Living our values into the future– What do we care about; what do we wish to do better or differently?  Look for the next post on or about March 24.

Freedom of Thought, Integrity of Values

For most of us any threat to our expression of belief or opinion would be a threat to our personal integrity.  Freedom of thought and expression is a hallmark of liberty and fundamental to a free society.  This post raises questions about how the assumptions we make about beliefs and opinions can impact freedom, both our own and that of others.

Our personal freedom, however, depends on accurate information, including the accuracy of our assumptions about the interests, beliefs, and views of others.

What do our assumptions have to do with freedom? My answer is that our ability to engage effectively, safely, with real people in the real world, both friend and foe, depends on accuracy.

Assumptions are beliefs about facts (or the views of others) that may or may not be true.  My suggestion here is that unexamined assumptions can limit our knowledge of the reality we are dealing with, and thus our ability to respond effectively.  Inaccurate assumptions interfere with the free flow of information, which limits our personal autonomy and independence.

And so I ask you: If we have not investigated and fully understood opposing points of view, how can we engage with and influence others effectively?  How can we question their assumptions?

I do not suggest that agreement is necessary.  That will often be impossible.  But, being mindful of the dangers of untested assumptions can protect us from misunderstandings or worse.

Questions of judgment often involve complex circumstances and depend on information coming from multiple sources.  Sometimes complexity can be aggravating, but if we value the integrity of our beliefs and our role in the world, there is no alternative to pursuing accuracy.  After all, our personal views reflect our identity as decent and intelligent people.

Problems often catch us by surprise as a consequence of assumptions we did not realize we were making.  This can happen socially or politically.  It happens in science.  I have raised a variety of questions in recent blog posts about historical assumptions that I think deserve a closer look.

These included supposed promises that have long been accepted as inevitable by western society and by Americans in particular: The assumption, for example, that rational governance is possible if we simply trust the wisdom of experts, or that nature will eventually submit completely to human control.

Today we face an extraordinary series of interrelated crises that call these and many other assumptions into question.  Political dysfunction, social and economic disarray, and a nearly total lack of civility and cooperation, leave us enmeshed in frustration.

As regular readers know, I have been suggesting that local communities provide the only effective opportunity for Americans to seek local security in the midst of social disorder.

This is a very challenging proposition.  But, I do not believe we have a choice.  The lessons of civility, trustworthiness and cooperative problem-solving may have to be learned by force of necessity.  Our survival might depend on them.

Teaming up with a diverse group of neighbors to meet shared needs will not be easy.  It will require personal courage and initiative.  Understanding does not necessarily lead to agreement, but it lubricates and sustains working relationships.  It is the path to genuine trust.

The greatest challenge for building community in a disintegrating society will not be differences of opinion, but differences in our values.

We each have numerous values, perhaps more than we realize.  Values are not casual ideas or choices; many are deeply rooted in our interests and needs. If we are to live together, certain essential values must be shared; others might challenge our patience, but not our trust.

To find safety in community we will need to seriously examine our assumptions in the clear light of honest dialog.  I believe we will find more agreement than we expect, but we cannot delay. Dependable community will depend on genuine understanding.

We must never abandon our values, but rather control the manner in which we manage them.  Each of us carries a personal perspective that will contribute to the character and wisdom of the whole – as long as we refrain from allowing ego or emotion to overwhelm the context in which we find ourselves.

We must learn how to work with others, to influence one another little by little, and to live with grace and charity.

Tom

Note to regular readers:  Please watch for the next post on or about February 10.

Knowing Our Strength

The first step is ours to take.  We can address one another with dignity and join with our neighbors to resolve problems and address local needs.  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.

The road to security is built with civility and paved with trust.  To make it so will be difficult.  It is, however, the only alternative to disaster.

The argument that the future can only be built on the foundation of dependable communities is as old as history.  It follows from the rational perception that conflict is a condition in human relationships and can only be understood and transcended in and through human relationships.

It is in the struggle with interpersonal relationships that direct and honest communication can take place.  The means for making this fractious process effective in the context of American history is the subject of this blog and forthcoming book.

Some may say that it is too late.  I say that Americans are courageous, resourceful, resilient.  The United States was conceived in controversy, and the pragmatic vision of the Founders came with recognition that wisdom and strength are found in 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.  The Founders gave us structure.  It is our responsibility to make it work.

Our answer to crisis will determine the shape of our future.  We find ourselves confronted today by one of the great tests of history, a challenge to the intent embodied 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.  It is argued here that this must begin in our local communities – the historic home to pure democracy and the seat of civilization.

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 – a dangerous crossroads, yet one that offers us a unique window of opportunity to affirm and uphold our exceptional and multifaceted identity as a nation.

In navigating through an extraordinary confluence of sequential crises we will be forced to renew our values, think on our feet, and make both pragmatic and ethical adjustments.  A creative process is now underway that would not be possible otherwise.

An assessment of shared values is in order, and reconsideration of the generosity of spirit that once made America so attractive to the world.

In September we will consider the foresight of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 that led to the system of protections, checks and balances that make the American structure of governance what it is.  First, however, we will examine the reasons why diversity has given America a dynamic strength – not as a nice idea, but as a pragmatic imperative.

If American communities are to emerge into a vibrant matrix of local and regional networks, they will depend on citizens with diverse skills and varied perspectives who are capable of teamwork and practical problem-solving.

Resistance to diversity often involves our discomfort with those we perceive as “outsiders”, people who look or think differently than we do, or who come from unfamiliar cultural backgrounds.  Yet, in crises, many differences will allow critical problem-solving that we can ill afford to do without.

It is important to feel confidence in our own ideas and values.  Yes, but why should we be afraid of different ways of thinking?

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 others different from ourselves is a blessing and a gift.  And, in the event of social and economic collapse – it may be the key to survival.

Tom

Please watch for the next post on or about August 19:  The unexpected wisdom in diversity – how it happens and what makes it work.

Cooperation or Collapse?

And what of our differences?  The diversity of views and perspectives that divide Americans in the early years of the 21st century are unquestionably the deepest that have existed since the Civil War.

Our differences are based on many things today: ethical and religious values, economic disparities and personal experience with hardship, our understanding of history, and our perceptions of the very real dangers facing the world.

The vitality of the American Republic has always been energized by the clash of differing opinions.  The national character is rooted in the fertile engagement of divergent ideas that test and expand our wide-ranging perspectives.  America has flourished on the principle of pluralism.

Our opinions, values, perceptions all deserve respect; yet we disagree vehemently on matters of fundamental importance. We have good reasons for holding our views. This is the way it is supposed to be in a healthy civil society.

And this begs a critical question: How can we find a way to live and work together in a time of maximum stress?

As sequential crises take hold, is the security of our families and communities important enough that we are willing to do what is necessary to build trust and dependability, meeting life-sustaining needs and working effectively with our neighbors – many of whom we have substantial differences with?

Are we prepared to struggle for this country shoulder-to-shoulder, indeed to be truly loyal to one another as Americans?

And, what is it really that makes this a cause worth fighting for?

I believe that such questions lead to the pivotal question I have described on this blog as a “severe choice” (June 24).

Many readers have expressed concerns about the imposing challenges these questions represent.  Indeed, we stand at a monumental turning point in the nation’s history.

The survival of the Republic will require certain virtues that Americans are not generally known for—moral responsibility, dependability, trustworthiness.  Our most fundamental challenge will be learning to view others – especially our opponents – in essentially ethical rather than political terms.

This is not about charity.  A level of civility is required that goes far beyond kindness and common decency.  If Americans are to turn the corner, it will be with a civilized and responsible attitude that appears unfamiliar at present.

Cooperation does not require compromising our principles.  Indeed, unexpected opportunities for influencing one another will surely come with working together to address common needs, especially in the face of crises.

Times of danger tend to open ones’ personal perspective, allowing us to see with new eyes and hear with new ears.

It is neither practical nor civilized to go to war with one another when our common interests depend on our ability to communicate clearly and to engage in rational problem-solving.  What is essential is not that we agree, but that we seek dependable cooperation in the face of serious threats.

Naturally, this will require more than a right attitude.  Practical skills will be necessary to help us work effectively in small groups, ensure food security, make consultative decisions and manage conflict, organize projects and start small businesses.

Together we will share and develop the necessary skills.

Under the present conditions of social disintegration, strident divisiveness, and dysfunctional institutions, I have encouraged Americans to turn aside from partisan politics, at least temporarily, to focus primary attention on practical needs in our local communities.

I am not at all opposed to effecting change by traditional means. However, as the crisis deepens I believe we will gain far more safety and control over our lives through community building. And, I believe this effort will impart many of the essential lessons that will lead to a decent future.

This is my message.  Dependable community is the ground of civilization.

However complex the problems we face, in the final analysis we are confronted by a single simple question.  Will we accept the destruction of civilized society, a rending of the very fabric of the Republic, and retreat into a state of siege?  Or, will we have the courage to begin anew?

Tom

A note to readers: Please watch for the next blog post on or about August 5.

To believe absurdities…

Police 2 (BradWSutton)

“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.”  –Voltaire

(Photo credit: Brad W Sutton)

 

Principled Means, Principled Ends

These are precarious times.  We find ourselves confronted with growing social and economic instability and an uncertain future.  We do not want to sit on our hands.  Yet, unprecedented complexity and uncertainty make it impossible to know what to expect.

How easy it would be to let emotions rule, tipping the future into chaos and endangering the very goals we wish to secure.

It is with this in mind that I take up where I left off in the previous post (June 9).  I see two pragmatic reasons why political violence will not get Americans where we want to go.  One is tactical.  The second is strategic – and the more important.

Any patriot preparing today for armed resistance in the tradition of 1776 will pit himself against an extraordinary opponent.  He will be outmaneuvered and outgunned by fully militarized police possessing the most advanced surveillance technology and backed by massive firepower.

The mythic ideal of the citizen soldier remains deeply engrained in the American psyche.  But the plain fact is, if you imagine a heroic Star Wars scenario in defense of freedom and justice you are indulging in fantasy.

I am not interested in arguing about this because there is a much bigger problem, and it is this:  Who exactly do you intend to fight?

American law enforcement agencies and the United States military are served by loyal, committed Americans.   These are our people, our sons and daughters, friends and neighbors.  They are working people, they have families, and they care about the future.

It is our responsibility to win them over, not beat them up.  They should be approached respectfully, with persuasive argument and attractive example.

As I wrote here last week, violence committed by Americans against Americans would contradict the rationale behind the impetus to violence itself.   It would be self-contradictory, pitting us against one another and subverting the integrity and viability of the American Idea as a guiding force for the good.

Our views on politics or government, the integrity of the Constitution, or the corruption of principles, are all serious matters.  But, public servants, police officers and bureaucrats are not the problem.

We must respect these people, not just as a matter of principle, but because we need them. They are essential to a constructive solution.

Americans are not to be persuaded when we are attacked, not for some high-minded cause or anything else.  When faced with hostility we naturally close ranks, and clear thinking stops.

Even the misguided rebellion of tiny splinter groups will be destructive to the cause of liberty.  Any resort to force can easily lead to cascading consequences in which violence begets violence in a downward spiral, tearing the fabric of the republic and threatening the progress of constructive action.

Furthermore, it is simply not necessary.

Change is needed that is real, lasting, and built on the solid ground of dependable communities – not quicksand.  I never said this would be easy, so let me be clear – the skills, attitudes, and discipline that create and build community are at the heart of what we need to learn to create and build the future.

This is more than a matter of survival.  For thousands of years community has formed the foundation of civilization.  The essential concern in the present hour, and the basis by which to judge constructive action, must be the spirit and the quality of the future we wish for.  It is the means that determine the end.

This is not a theoretical nicety, but hard-nosed truth.  Understanding it will determine success or failure.

We are capable of being decent, patient and forbearing, of cooperating to resolve practical problems and even saving each others’ lives.  Personal principles, values and views must certainly be respected.  But, rising above our differences will be essential if we are to identify shared values, ensure comprehensive security, and begin to build a stable social economy for the future.

Going to war with our fellow citizens would make no sense.  Indeed, the ends we seek could be delayed by decades and possibly destroyed by impractical or intemperate courses of action.

Tom

Next week: A Foundation Based on Values

A note to regular readers: Thank you for all the comments, ideas, and perspectives shared in recent weeks, especially on the Facebook page.  You are a valuable “reality test” for me as a writer.  This project would be impossible without you.

Ends and Means…

Music 4-x

“The principle that the ends justify the means is in individualist ethics regarded as the denial of all morals”

–F. A. Hayek

“He who chooses the beginning of the road chooses the place it leads to.  It is the means that determine the end.”

–Harry Emerson Fosdick

“An attempt to achieve the good by force is like an attempt to provide a man with a picture gallery at the price of cutting out his eyes.”

–Ayn Rand

“They say ‘means are after all means’.  I would say ‘means are after all everything’.  As the means, so the end.”

–Mohandas Gandhi

“The first sign of corruption in a society that is still alive is that the end justifies the means.”

–Georges Bernanos

 

The First Principle

If we are to regain our self-confidence with the vision and values of the founders, it would be useful to employ means that can actually lead to the goals we seek.  Let’s proceed then with careful deliberation rather than emotion and ego.

No American responds well to abuse, verbal or otherwise.  Nothing will subvert our purpose more quickly than a combative attitude that alienates the very people we need to win over.

Will we allow our differences to tear us apart?

We have choices.  We can choose to join forces to tackle the practical problems that threaten the safety and security of our communities.  We can choose to distinguish ourselves with common decency and cooperation in the interests of a well-reasoned and purposeful future.

It is only in dependable personal relationships tasked with essential responsibilities that we can truly come to know and influence one another.

We live in an era of dangerous instability.   It is a time to refrain from antagonistic words; a time to refocus our creative energy away from the dysfunction of partisan politics, so to secure the essential needs of our local communities.

I have described three essential elements that make community possible – trust, dependability, and constructive action.  These elements will only be found in communities where neighbors rise above their differences to serve a higher purpose.  And, for a self-respecting people, purpose must be something more than “survival.”

As regular readers know, I have chosen the term “constructive action” to describe the positive means by which we can realistically engage with one another and progress.  And, I have explained why a shared sense of purpose is helpful in guiding constructive action.

Shared purpose, I wrote, is a lens through which a community can bring the challenges of necessity into focus, and coordinate the efforts of diverse personalities.  Purpose can provide a standard by which to determine priorities and judge progress.

So, how can we understand constructive action?

Constructive action is based on the refusal to do harm.  It is action taken in a spirit of respect and kindness, a spirit founded upon the refusal to do violence to fellow citizens.

The principle here is the refusal to hurt – by impatience, dishonesty, hatred, or wishing ill of anybody.

I submit to you that this is the essential first principle upon which all other principles, values, and purposes depend.

Please do not misinterpret constructive action as merely a negative state of harmlessness. Quite the contrary, while constructive action in its purest form attempts to treat even the evil-doer with grace, it by no means assists the evil-doer in doing wrong or tolerates wrong-doing in any way.

The state of constructive action requires that we resist what is wrong and disassociate ourselves from it even if doing so antagonizes the wrong-doer.

There is a close relationship between the positive spirit of kindness, respect, and trustworthiness that characterizes constructive action and the moral integrity of the civil society we wish to build.  As means and ends, the two are inseparable.

Constructive action is the means.  Unity of purpose, grounded in the truthfulness of moral integrity, is the end.

Western political thinking has always considered means to be either an abstraction of tactics or simply the character of social and political machinery.  In both cases means are considered only in their service to the goals of particular political interests.

We will approach our understanding of means in quite a different way, replacing end-serving goals with an end-creating purpose.

Such an approach to means is necessary if we seek to apply traditional American values to rapidly changing circumstances.

This is the reason for my insistence on the meaningful engagement of all Americans in this endeavor, despite our vast diversity.

A vital and energetic future can only be realized by leveraging our differences in knowledge, skills, perspectives.  And, the closer we work together the greater our opportunity to influence, attract and inspire.

Again, we have clear choices to make.  Either we choose to recover and refine the fundamental meaning of the American Idea, or we can walk away forever from the safety, stability, and purpose of a future we can trust and believe in.

Tom

Next week: The Second Amendment, Then and Now.

A note to regular readers:  Your ideas, views, and constructive feedback have been immensely helpful to me, especially on the Facebook page.  This project would be impossible without you.  To receive alerts by email you may click on “Follow” on the right side of this page.

To build or destroy…

Farm 1-x

“To build may have to be the slow and laborious task of years.  To destroy can be the thoughtless act of a single day.”

–Winston Churchill

 

 

 

Hard Realities, Practical Necessities

Americans know that something is wrong.  We can feel it.  It is easy to place blame; there is a lot to find fault with.  But, many of us sense that something profound is happening, something that goes far deeper than the headlines, something that has been a long time coming.

For the majority of Americans, social and economic conditions have been deteriorating for a long time.  We are increasingly vulnerable to potential systemic disruptions.  Some threats are obvious; others lie hidden in a complex web of instability.

Our failure to prepare reflects a lack of both information and imagination.  We accept the present as normal, even when it is unhealthy, distorted, or dangerous.  Most of us expect that every day will be like the last.

To recognize that something is not right, or that current circumstances could lead to pain, requires some imagination.  This can be overdone, of course.  But, so too can carelessness.

Imagination applied rationally is a survival skill.  Let me offer an example.

James Rickards is a monetary economist who advises the Department of Defense and the CIA concerning terrorist threats to the global monetary system and financial markets. Writing about our well-equipped intelligence agencies, staffed by smart people who are intent on protecting the United States, he tells us that these agencies were monitoring most of the individuals who subsequently carried out the 9/11 attacks.

Analysts were aware that several were being trained to fly airplanes.  In short, the intelligence community had the information it needed to warn of the impending attack.

The only thing missing, says Rickards, was imagination.

That our family and friends think we are being alarmist when we express concerns about the future is easy to understand.  They are human.  At some point we may need to care for them, so we must trust our perceptions and think through the implications.

There are numerous resources available, in bookstores and on the web, which can help us prepare for a long crisis.

However, this blog (and book project) is focused instead on the personal, social, and relational challenges involved: the effort to build dependable communities, and to accept moral responsibility in an increasingly disrupted and desperate world.

Local communities can organize themselves around felt-needs, when we are ready to rise above our differences.  But, having little positive experience working with groups can be a problem when trouble strikes.

We may have experienced community in a church group, club, or sporting pastime, but not usually in the immediate neighborhood where we live, and not in the face of threats to our safety and well-being.

A dependable bond among neighbors will be necessary to meet essential needs.  But, most of us do not know our neighbors and cannot depend on them.  We might not even have introduced ourselves to those we see regularly on the street or in the grocery store.

Our natural inclination to be independent and to avoid troublesome arrangements has led to the widespread loss of local associations and trustworthy relationships.

For many decades there have been few compelling reasons for Americans to seek meaningful community with our neighbors. Yet, when things stop working we will have no one to depend on except each other.

If we are to find safety and security in a crisis, it will be necessary to develop a range of interpersonal and organizational skills, and hopefully some technical knowledge as well.

Most of us can learn how to grow food, or at least to work with others who do.  But, as the crisis deepens we will discover necessities we had not thought about.  Organizing our lives without electricity or a functional sewage system or safe drinking water will require that we cooperate to solve problems, and in some cases solve them quickly.

It will be this personal engagement with one another, forced by hard realities, which will bring Americans together where we belong – as good neighbors in our communities.

Hiding under a rock might feel like a good idea in a shooting war, but it will not lead to the kind of world most of us want to live in.

Tom

Next week:  Security and the Use of Force.

A note to new readers:  Blog entries adapted from the forthcoming book are posted on most Fridays at the main blog site and on the Facebook page.  To receive alerts by email you may click “Follow” in the column on the right.

Stability and Constructive Action

Security concerns increase with social instability in the world around us.  Our safety and well-being will ultimately depend, as I observed in the previous post, upon the stability and trustworthiness of the conditions we put in place around us.

Stability and security are mutually reinforcing, but without stability any effort to increase security is futile.  Stability makes our efforts to create security possible, and it benefits from those efforts.

It is natural to think that security must come first, but actually it is the other way around.  The key to security is effective community and the value of our personal investment in each other.

The first priority for any stable community is the strength of interpersonal relationships. These form the basis for trust, for good communication and effective problem-solving.

Dependable community depends on dependable relationships.

Americans are used to thinking of security as the responsibility of trained professionals who are expected to deal with emergency situations.  That is because we have been accustomed to stable institutions and dependable systems.

This may not always be true.  Things we have taken for granted in the past may become emergency concerns – if we are not prepared for them.

Food security is an important example.  Supermarkets typically limit their distribution centers to a three-day supply.  If the supply chain is disrupted and their vendors are unable to deliver, we are in trouble.

Unless we use our imaginations, the interruption of systems we take for granted will catch us off guard.  A systemic disruption could be caused by an Ebola-type epidemic, a cyber-attack on the banking system or national grid, a global monetary crisis, or any number of other reasons.

These are not unreasonable possibilities.

In my view, we would do well to think about the implications – from public health threats and emergency medicine to the need for a cash economy.  Building dependable networks of support among neighboring communities will also be important.

Knowing how to work effectively in groups will be key.  This will mean developing personal skills. Group decision-making and resolving interpersonal conflicts need not be traumatic ordeals, if we have acquired the necessary skills.

We are quite capable of preparing ourselves if we remain purposeful and ready to learn.  In the coming months I will discuss additional challenges we are likely to face, and tools to address them.

I have written of the importance of such virtues as trustworthiness, dependability, and responsibility.  I expect these make sense to you.  But, I have also introduced an idea that might seem novel, which I call “constructive action.”  And, last week I argued that stability is not possible without forward motion.

Why are motion and constructive action indispensable to our endeavors?

Think of it this way: Keeping our balance while riding a bicycle requires forward motion.  In any community, business, or organization, activity guided by a sense of purpose serves a similar function.  No social group can sustain coherence or affectionate ties unsupported by vision and purpose.

We will face two important areas of consideration as we consolidate our communities: What we do and how we do it.  The concept of constructive action concerns the latter – the way we can work together effectively.

This has a direct bearing on security.  To put it simply, constructive action is about being constructive rather than destructive, building rather than tearing down, freeing rather than oppressing.

A constructive approach requires a positive attitude and will contribute to improved safety and well-being.  Destructive actions and a negative attitude will set us back, the results of emotional reaction rather than rational purposefulness.

One leads toward the ends we seek; the other pushes us farther away.

Shared purpose is a lens through which the challenges of necessity can be brought into focus and the efforts of diverse personalities can be coordinated.  Shared purpose provides a standard by which a community can judge priorities and progress.

With sufficient willpower and discipline, each of us can develop our skills and learn how to do this.  And, a positive attitude will support rational thinking and a constructive way forward.

Tom

Next week:  Hard realities, practical necessities

A note to readers: Please consider supporting this blog and book project by suggesting that your friends and associates that they take a look.  And, clicking the Follow button will provide email alerts.

Walking the Talk

Big corporations often seem to behave with disregard for the humanity of citizens and community.  Geared to function with a singular profit-making intensity that is resistant to compromise, these are not human creatures.

Living with a dominant corporate culture, we find ourselves perceived as economic units, “consumers” pressed into service by a materialist mindset.

And so we have been isolated from one another, forced apart by social forces that are difficult to overcome.  The personal experience of meaning and interconnectedness that civil society depends upon has evaporated.

Americans need not submit to such a sorry destiny.

Independence is always relative, but it is an attitude and a choice.  Self-sufficiency could actually become a matter of life or death.  It can mean food security or financial stability or being a good parent.  Its’ meaning will take on new dimensions when crises strike.  But, there is much more to it than survival.

It is in community and in the quality of our active relationships that we form the matrix of a free society.  Freedom is realized in serving a principled purpose, and in the vitality of lives that are engaged and in motion.

It is in productive interaction with others that ideas are shared and problem-solving is most effective.  In trustworthy relationships, self-sufficiency gains strength and dependability.

But, are we willing to take this on?

We might not want to put up with community.  A few try to avoid it all together.  But, it is impossible to completely ignore it – unless we take snowshoes, an axe and a rifle, and walk into the wilderness.

I know how attractive solitude can be.  I also know that it would deny me the opportunity to grow as an individual, as well as the honor and adventure of dedication to the country I love.

Historically, the basic building blocks of the American Republic have been communities. And, the bonds that held everything together were the personal relationships that make communities work.

Communities are formed by the inspiration and determination of individuals and families, interwoven into mutually supportive networks, and networks of networks.  And, no, it will not be easy to regain what came to us so naturally in the past.

Let me state again, however, that the ultimate visionary force can only be that loyalty to the American Idea that welcomes diversity and rejects hostile divisiveness.

Americans are accustomed to contentious politics and unconstrained partisanship.  There will always be value in the clash of differing opinions.  However, we have entered a period of instability and potential danger.  It is time to rise above our differences in the interests of ensuring the balance and cohesion of the Republic.

We face the instability of extraordinary complexity, deteriorating infrastructure, and institutions that are trapped in the past.  Things are not going to work the way we think they should, and there will be no one to resolve the problems except ourselves.

If we are to rebuild a society in which the foolishness of the past is not repeated, we must think constructively about the qualities and principles that are needed.  Generosity and good will are essential human virtues.  We must keep them strong in our hearts, but help one another to understand why they are not enough.  Some things just don’t work.

Finding solutions to community problems will demand that we put our heads together.  It will require consultation, deliberation, and creative imagination.  And, it calls for the most diverse range of minds and perspectives possible.  The way to maximize effective problem-solving is to include people with a broad range of experience and practical skills.

This might sound idealistic.  In fact, it is the only way to restore a broken society.  Learning how to do it will be hard work, but people of good faith will always have the capacity to succeed.

We must hold our personal beliefs clearly in mind, while keeping in mind that we can expect less conflict and far greater security if we connect, listen and learn, understand and influence.

Holding ourselves apart from one another in disagreement while hurling insults can only reap destruction.  Engaging with one another can be extremely challenging, but there is no other way.

Tom

Next week: Foundations for security.