Tag Archives: #values

Renewal of Our Core Values

Posted on by

Answering questions about what has gone wrong is never comfortable. Some truths are not pretty. But, revitalizing core American values and the restoration of a once vibrant civic spirit will require that we recognize what has been lost and why. I believe an honest appraisal is in order.

The current difficulties have developed over a long period of time. The gradual loss of a commitment to integrity in all areas of life has left Americans without the interwoven fabric of community relationships, without a soulful center or shared sense of purpose.

We find ourselves dominated by materialism and immersed in a homogenized culture with little conscious identity. Where is there a meaningful commitment to community, to the dignity of mutual respect, to embracing shared responsibility for local needs?

Most significantly, in my view, Americans have become obsessed with immediacy. We want what we want and we want it now. Reason and foresight have been eclipsed by a fixation on material appearances, and yet we are unabashed about entertaining ourselves with violence and degrading behavior.

Even the once humiliating liabilities of personal debt seem to be of no concern. All possibility of generating real wealth is abandoned in exchange for false appearances bought with future income.

Strange as it may be, we have essentially abandoned the future.

The moral bankruptcy and distortions of logic represented by this posture have influenced almost everything in our national life. An undisciplined attitude has led us to the brink of disaster, and our insistence on freedom from institutional and cultural restraints is fraught with contradictions.

For example, our respect for the individual requires that we honor the independent integrity and privacy of each citizen, and yet we have abandoned this principle out of fear for our own safety.

Similarly, we have failed to see that privacy has been sacrificed when we welcome the obscenity and titillation of mass media into our homes. Personal integrity is lost to a fascination with “the raw stuff of life,” in the words of the conservative American philosopher Richard Weaver:

“The extremes of passion and suffering are served up to enliven the breakfast table or to lighten the boredom of an evening at home. The area of privacy has been abandoned because the definition of person has been lost; there is no longer a standard by which to judge what belongs to the individual man. Behind the offense lies the repudiation of sentiment in favor of immediacy.”

Richard Weaver wrote these words before the advent of television. And he was not the first to make such an observation. A quarter century earlier George Bernard Shaw commented that “an American has no sense of privacy. He does not know what it means. There is no such thing in the country.”

Weaver warned Americans of a self-destructive streak that would ultimately lead to a crisis. He pointed out our fascination with specialization and with the parts of things at the expense of understanding and respecting the whole. He argued that an obsession with fragmentary parts without regard for their function necessarily leads to instability.

Such instability is insidious, penetrating all relationships and institutions. In his words, “It is not to be anticipated that rational self-control will flourish in the presence of fixation upon parts.”

This is not the fault of government – except to the extent that government, managed by people like ourselves, has joined whole-heartedly in the party. In a democracy it is tragically easy for government policy to degenerate until it serves the worst inclinations of a self-interested electorate.

Consequently we have descended into the financial profligacy of the past fifty years and are now the most indebted nation in history by a wide margin. Ours has been a twisted path, but with a clearly visible end. And, the implicate outcome remains ignored.

If we are to recover our balance, it is essential that we recognize the wrong-headed thinking that got us here.

Values and principle are not in question; only wisdom. What we are challenged to do now is to reconsider the way we think.

Tom

Next week: Freedom or paralysis.

Dear readers: I would be grateful for your thoughtful remarks and feedback.

Americans Co-opted by the State?

Posted on by

For more than a hundred years Americans expressed their values and creative energy in numerous organizations and associations. As we saw in the previous post, Americans overcame constraints on their freedom through their own initiative and sense of community.

Generations later, however, action has been replaced by inaction. A once spirited culture of engagement has been replaced by an increasingly self-centered attitude, the loss of community, and the isolating influences of the automobile, television, and the digital age.
Is it these technologies that have isolated us from one another?

Economic historian Niall Ferguson argues no. Rather he suggests 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.” He cites the prophetic vision of Tocqueville in 1840, when he imagined a future America in which the spirit of community has been co-opted and neutered by government:

“I see an innumerable crowd of like and equal men 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 agree 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. I believe the degeneration of attitudes and behavior cannot be divorced from the isolating influences of corporate culture, the dispersion of communities by the automobile, or the gradual loss of a moral, metaphysical center.

Telecommunications and commercial airlines have brought the world together on a macro level, but they have also left us disinclined us to engage with our neighbors.

I believe the long slide to isolation is the consequence of social forces that have followed the trajectory of human progress since the founding of the American Republic, and which we can only fault ourselves for accepting.

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

Tom

Next week: The renewal of core American values.

Note to readers: Your comments and feedback would be much appreciated. As a writer I would find this very helpful.

The Wellspring of Individual Will

Posted on by

We find ourselves now at a severe turning point, confronted by the consequences of the past and the anger and confusion of the present. Yet, this is also an opportunity, a rare moment in history that calls us to clarify our purpose and correct the attitudes and behaviors that brought us to this place.

We have lost a sense of ultimate purpose, and thus the conceptual framework upon which rational judgment depends. This has made us vulnerable both to our own vices and to the predatory interests and manipulative power of institutions that know our weaknesses.

To straighten things out will require that we address tough questions with open-minded objectivity. The effort may not be comfortable, but it will be essential if we are to regain our balance and rebuild our resolve.

In his recent book, The Great Degeneration, economic historian Niall Ferguson has provided us with a compelling review of what has come to pass. He considers four areas in which the degeneration of values and loss of social stability in the United States has had devastating consequences.

His four areas of concern are, to use my own words, 1) the loss of personal and social responsibility, 2) the disintegration of the market economy, 3) the role of the rule of law, and 4) the essential qualities of civil society.

Dr. Ferguson reminds us of our past, and in particular the vigorous civil and cultural life of nineteenth century America: “I want to ask,” he writes, “how far it is possible for a truly free nation to flourish in the absence of the kind of vibrant civil society we used to take for granted? I want to suggest that the opposite of civil society is uncivil society, where even the problem of anti-social behavior becomes a problem for the state.”

He goes on to cite Alexis de Tocqueville from the first volume of his famous commentary, Democracy in America, which was published in 1840:

“America is, among the countries of the world, the one where they have taken most advantage of association and where they have applied that powerful mode of action to a greater diversity of objects.

“Independent of the permanent associations created by law under the names of townships, cities and counties, there is a multitude of others that owe their birth and development only to the individual will.

“The inhabitant of the United States learns from birth that he must rely on himself to struggle against the evils and obstacles of life; he has only a defiant and restive regard for social authority and he appeals to its authority only when he cannot do without it….

“In the United States, they associate for the goals of public security, of commerce and industry, of morality and religion. There is nothing the human will despairs of attaining by the free action of the collective power of individuals.”

Dr. Ferguson writes that “Tocqueville saw America’s political associations as an indispensable counterweight to the tyranny of the majority in modern democracy. But it was the non-political associations that really fascinated him.”

“Americans of all ages, all conditions, all minds constantly unite. Not only do they have commercial and industrial associations in which all take part, but they also have a thousand other kinds: religious, moral, grave, futile, very general and very particular, immense and very small; Americans use associations to give fêtes, to found seminaries, to build inns, to raise churches, to distribute books…. Finally, if it is a question of bringing to light a truth or developing a sentiment with the support of great example, they associate.”

What happened to American civil society? And what is the consequence of this loss?

As Tocqueville reports, Americans had once succeeded in overcoming constraints to freedom through their own initiative and sense of community.

Unfortunately, action has been replaced by inaction. A once spirited culture of engagement, based on committed interpersonal relationships, has been replaced by a self-centered attitude, the loss of community, and the isolating influences of the automobile, television, and the digital age.

Surely it is time to restore what we once did so well, and to address the great challenges ahead with renewed strength and responsibility.

Tom

Next week: When individual will is co-opted by government.

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

The Will to Freedom

Posted on by

During the period when America was first being settled by Europeans, the emerging identity of the new nation was influenced powerfully by a hopeful confidence in the future: the belief that freedom would lead ultimately to general prosperity and peace.

A new understanding of history had, in the words of Duke Professor Michael Allen Gillespie, “opened up the possibility that human beings need not merely accommodate themselves to the natural world. Instead they could become masters of nature and reshape it to meet their needs through the methodological application of will and intelligence. This new understanding of the relation of man and nature had profound implications for man’s own understanding of his place time.”

The “will to freedom” as conceived and understood by philosophers and treasured by Americans from the beginning, thus became the dominant theme on a continent that seemed unlimited, but for the noble peoples it displaced.

We have not been willing to tolerate anything that stands in our way, including those once proud and independent indigenous American peoples.

The contradictions hidden in the vision of absolute freedom and unlimited prosperity have remained largely unconscious and unresolved, whether they be social, economic, or physical. Forced by extraordinary circumstances, our attachment to inflexible absolutes is today pitching us into a confusion of emotionally charged philosophical and political conflicts.

Several related questions were raised in previous posts.

Do we still think we can make ourselves “master and possessor of nature” without respect for the balances that life on earth depends upon?

Is absolute freedom possible, given the complexity and destructive potential that science and technology have opened to us? What do we expect, for example, of rapidly advancing surveillance technologies that are capable of prying into every corner of our lives?

Finally, what do the new realities we face today suggest about the meaning of freedom? Can we address these questions thoughtfully and retake control of our destiny as wise, creative, and courageous people?

The historic questions have taken on a contemporary character, but they are essentially the same questions. Earlier generations evaded these questions by exalting science and materialism above all else. Consequently, the denial of a rational God and the suppression of religious perspective diverted attention from a logical contradiction that transcended philosophy and belief.

When the constraints and limitations imposed by belief in an all-knowing and all-powerful God were disposed of with the cry of “God is dead!” they were immediately replaced by constraints and limitations imposed by belief in a supposedly mechanical natural world.

It was, of course, assumed that science would soon master nature, human beings would succeed in perfecting rational governance, and humankind would realize absolute freedom.  But, nature proved to be far more complex and unpredictable than was expected. And, having rejected the God of traditional religion, humankind has found itself confronted with a severe discipline imposed by nature, but without the grace or guidance of a loving Teacher.

And “rational governance”? Well, we have certainly witnessed in graphic terms the manner in which self-appointed leaders of “rational thought” led us into the totalitarian nightmares of communism, fascism, and Nazism.

Please make no mistake: This past is not far behind us.

If we are to reconsider the cataclysms of the first half of the twentieth century and the horrific consequences of the many bungled attempts to control human destiny – politically, economically, and scientifically – we might start to see the future more clearly. Indeed, we might then avoid potential disasters before they befall us.

The unresolved philosophical problems inherited from the past will continue to torment us if we fail to understand them. And, the danger can worsen with sloppy definitions and confusion about the requirements and limitations of freedom and prosperity.

Agreement among us is not required, but understanding the consequences of our actions in the real world is of immense significance.

We cannot neatly sidestep such fundamental unresolved questions, which I would suggest have embedded themselves deeply in the American psyche.

I look forward to reading your comments.

Tom

Next week: Transcending Our Limitations

Freedom and Individualism

Posted on by

Colonial America was influenced significantly by philosophical ideas concerning freedom and the control of nature that many of us take for granted today.

One of the most influential of these ideas is the concept of independent human individuality, generally attributed to such thinkers as Petrarch and Erasmus, which emerged to form the conceptual foundations for the humanist movement.

Individualism has sometimes been associated with egotism and selfishness, but the concept was originally conceived as respect for the validity of the views and experience of the individual within his or her own sphere, and the ideal that each of us should be encouraged to develop our own natural gifts.

Humanism developed as a dialog among Christian thinkers and generated considerable controversy. Some of the resulting conflicts have never been resolved. The particular ideas that ultimately became most influential in the development of western civilization focused on the will to freedom and the notion of human control over nature.

Writing of this history, the American philosopher and political scientist Michael Allen Gillespie, a professor at Duke University, has observed that “modernity has two goals – to make man master and possessor of nature and to make human freedom possible. The question that remains is whether these two are compatible with one another.” (2008)

These ideas had a profound impact. First appearing during the European Renaissance, the historic transition from medieval to modern times, humanism gradually crystallized into the conviction that an ideal future civilization would bring freedom and prosperity to the world through the progress of science and rational governance.

To many the United States of America came to embody that promise.

The philosophical contradictions were, however, swept under the carpet and remain to this day. The fact that nature and the physical realm, (as well as the inevitable constraints of a complex society), impose limits to freedom rarely enters into consideration.

What limits? Well, we care for our families, whatever that requires. We cooperate with the necessary requirements of our employment. We commit ourselves willingly to civic engagements: athletic teams or dance recitals for our kids, charitable organizations and religious communities, all of which can take up most of our wakeful hours. And, we rarely fail to notice the impositions made upon us by government and the weather.

As with our social circumstances, the physical environment is an ever-present reality in our lives. We normally take these things for granted. But, there is more. The challenges to our sense of personal independence and integrity seem to be everywhere now. Even our principles are challenged.

By definition the word “freedom” implies that there is something we wish “to be free from.”
Many things can chafe in life, particularly the actions of others. Domineering and dysfunctional institutions are particularly aggravating in a time of deteriorating conditions. Yet, human beings have risen above the natural constraints in life to find meaning in a free society.

What is it that the world gained with the founding of the United States?

I believe we will find it useful to reflect on the development of our assumptions about freedom, a range of ideas that are central to the American character and have co-existed for 200 years with apparent ease, but which contain certain logical inconsistencies.

Clear thinking is of great importance today. A lack of clarity could subvert our best intentions, allowing muddled assumptions to fester behind the tension and contentiousness that threatens our self-confidence at the present turning point.

I suggest that we each reflect on what freedom means to us personally, not simply as a principle but in our immediate lives. We will explore this and related questions here in the coming weeks.

Tom

Next week: A Conflicted Legacy.

A Different Kind of Nation

Posted on by

The United States Constitution holds a unique place in the history of the world. The framers devised a new model for governance in 1787, conceived with a vision that has endured for more than two hundred years.

Are we willing to overlook the subsequent missteps and mistakes, the rude and selfish behavior, to consider what is truly of value to us? Are we prepared to step forward to reconstruct and defend what we wish to preserve?

If we let this inheritance die, what will we have lost?

The record has not always been pretty, but how could we expect anything like perfection when we have gathered the human race together from across the world into the managed chaos of a democratic republic?

We are blessed with a brilliantly conceived structure for governance that has channeled the creative genius of the world’s people into a dynamic force for capacity-building and prosperity.

As I tried to illustrate in the previous post, the framers made a studied effort to see the end in the beginning. We now stand at another profound turning point in history, a moment that will require a similar visionary maturity from Americans of all colors, stripes, and viewpoints.

There are those who think 200 years is a reasonable age for a democratic republic to reach its’ natural demise. However, the United States of America is not just any democratic republic. And, I have yet to hear the voices of failure suggest an ultimate outcome.

I think it more reasonable to understand 200 years as the age of maturity, influenced in part by the affairs of the world, when this nation must necessarily come of age.

We have responsibility for a trust that is grounded in the heritage of the American idea. It is the responsibility to provide an immensely complex and now faltering world with the stability required to support the next surge forward by the human race.

This is a trust that no other nation has the vision, the strength of will or generosity of spirit, to embrace. Brought into focus by the vision of the American founders, it shines even now from the darkness, confident amid danger and hardship.

Imperfections remain. Those who point to the evils and injustices of the past are serving a necessary role. We must not forget what was ignoble or wrongly conceived. It is not helpful, however, to condemn the vision and good will that give character to what the world has admired.

Questions remain. Thoughtful citizens will consider the requirements that freedom makes in the way we handle our civil discourse, our disagreements and decision-making. Surely there can be no freedom for thought, for creativity, for economic advancement in the absence of a civil society that provides the space to engage freely and without fear.

Recognizing the necessity for the stable social order upon which all else depends, a practical reality confronts each of us every day. This is where the rubber meets the road.

Have we matured to the degree that we can listen compassionately to one another, explain our own views patiently, and, when necessary, live with our differences?

Do we have the capacity to approach freedom of expression responsibly, to work with one another respectfully? The crises-fueled tensions of the early 21st century leave us wondering.

Ultimately, freedom and prosperity depend upon our ability to engage in meaningful problem-solving, and to accept our differences within the supporting constraints of commonly held principles.

Why should we do this?

Because we are all Americans, that’s why.

Because we can resolve to regain our footing and get ourselves moving again in the right direction.  And, because if we fail we could lose everything.

Tom

Next week: American Identity, American Heritage

Man’s capacity for justice…

Posted on by

Tree 7

“Man’s capacity for justice makes democracy possible, but man’s inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary.”

–Reinhold Niebuhr

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

Freedom and Tolerance…

Posted on by

Sunrise 2

“Laws alone cannot secure freedom of expression; in order that every man present his views without penalty there must be spirit of tolerance in the entire population.”

–Albert Einstein

All your strength is in union…

Posted on by

Soldier 6-x

“All your strength is in union, all your danger is in discord.”

–Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

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