Roots of Discord

Like most people who are not in denial or defending some vested interest, I see the racism, misogyny, and xenophobia that are endemic in much of American culture and blatantly rampant in some quarters of national leadership. And while I deplore them as much as anybody, I don’t believe these traits are chosen—they are not intentional or premeditated—as some would imply. 

I see us beating each other up with accusations of these evil, even demonic, qualities; however, short of mental illness or demonic possession, I don’t believe anyone would, upon reflection, decide: “I’m going to be a racist.” In fact, most people deny they are racist. For the most part, I repeat, it's not intentional or premeditated.

More than individual traits, these character flaws are systemic. They are embedded in the human ethos and have been manifested in virtually every human culture at least since the emergence of the conquest cultures during the Bronze Age. The conquest cultures, with their characteristic myth of redemptive violence, were clearly articulated and described as early as the Babylonian creation myth (The Enuma Elish), which dates to the 12^th and 13^th centuries BCE.

 Walter Wink describes that myth of redemptive violence, which he began to discern while watching the TV cartoons with his children during the 1960s. He writes:

“I began to examine the structure of cartoons, and found the same pattern repeated endlessly: an indestructible hero is doggedly opposed to an irreformable and equally indestructible villain. Nothing can kill the hero, though for the first three quarters of the show he (rarely she) suffers grievously and appears hopelessly doomed, until miraculously, the hero breaks free, vanquishes the villain, and restores order until the next episode. Nothing finally destroys the villain or prevents his or her reappearance, whether the villain is soundly trounced, jailed, drowned, or shot into outer space.”[1]

In the Babylonian myth, creation itself is an act of violence, and that mythic structure spread from Ireland to China. Wink continues:

“Typically, a male war god residing in the sky fights a decisive battle with a female divine being, usually depicted as a monster or dragon, residing in the sea or abyss (the feminine element). Having vanquished the original enemy by war and murder, the victor fashions a cosmos from the monster’s corpse. Cosmic order requires the violent suppression of the feminine, and is mirrored in the social order by the subjection of women to men and people to ruler.”[2]

If the Babylonian myth of creation describes a very early example of acculturated misogyny, the testimony of endemic racism dates at least a millennium earlier to the Hebrew Scriptures, where it emerges from the feud between Abraham’s jealous wife, Sarai and his concubine (Sarai’s handmaiden), Hagar. Ishmael, Hagar’s son and the source of Sarai’s jealousy, is banished with his mother, and became known as the father of the Arabic peoples. Ishmael hated Abraham and his tribe because of his banishment, which essentially cut him off from a rather affluent inheritance as Abraham’s first-born. That hatred became the basis of the relationship between the Israelites and the descendants of Ishmael (which continues today) and is an early depiction of acculturated racism.

In every manifestation of misogyny and racism, whether systemic and cultural or individual and personal, the root is an intolerance of differences—xenophobia. I submit that xenophobia is the foundation of virtually every human relations dysfunction, and I would emphasize the “phobia” part of that word.

In recent writings and addresses fear consistently is identified as a major factor behind the animosity that festers like an open wound and divides the American people.

The antidote to xenophobia, I submit, is that people simply become better acquainted. In training for pastoral care, a primary principle was (and still is) that between me and any other human there are infinitely more similarities than differences.  But it’s human nature to focus on the differences. And that focus eventually leads to fear.

When people become better acquainted with each other, it’s common for them to discover those similarities—common interests and hopes and ideals—that become a basis for cooperative, peaceful relationships. I suggest that the same is true in group and community relationships.

What are your hopes? Your dreams? What do you want to accomplish? If you share your responses with me, I suspect we’ll discover that I have the same kinds of hopes and dreams and objectives, and the foundation will have been laid for the growth of trust and friendship.

Sound too good to be true? Too easy? I don’t know. Has it ever been tried? Really?

Really?

That’s the way it looks through the Flawed Glass that is my world view.

Together in the Walk,

Jim

---

[1] http://www2.goshen.edu/~joannab/women/wink99.pdf

[2] Ibid.

Is an Agreeable Disagreement Possible?

I’ve had enough of the uproar over NFL players kneeling during the National Anthem. If it were going somewhere—if there were a beneficial conclusion in sight—if anybody had anything new or different to say about it, I might have a different perspective. I’m just tired of the endless repetition of talking points devoid of any productive movement toward resolution.

September 25, on Monday Night Football, the Dallas Cowboys, their owner and their coaches, walked to the center of the field, arms linked, and knelt for a few seconds before the anthem was played, and they were soundly booed; which suggests the ballyhoo really may not be about disrespecting the anthem at all.

A man of color protested the ways some people of color are being unjustly treated. The preponderance of evidence—the tone of the bulk of social media reaction—suggests that had Mr. Kaepernick been white, and had he been protesting taxes, the public outcry likely would have been different.

In the first place, it’s a first amendment issue; and there’s a credible sense in which the primary outcry comes from the same populace that is passionate in its defense of the second amendment, as if one amendment is more important than another. Given our current political majority, and given that the President of the United States said that NFL players who kneel during the National Anthem should be fired[1], I think I can build a case that our first amendment rights are more likely to be abused than are our second amendment rights.

In the second place, taking a knee was never intended as an act of disrespect—of the anthem, or the flag or the sacrifice of our military personnel. Most of those who have chosen to take a knee have stated as much. As a veteran who has served under fire, I take no offense and sense no disrespect. In fact, I served (so I’m told) precisely to defend the rights of those who peacefully protest. More importantly, I served to defend the rights of those on whose behalf the NFL players are protesting.

In the third place, the magnitude of reaction against the act of taking a knee is effectively, if not intentionally, a gross distraction from the real issue. The motivation behind the kneeling protest is the documentable reality that people of color (and other minorities) are treated differently than whites are treated.

I repeat: the documentable reality. But the slightest mention of that reality on social media garners immediate and hostile response. Many people take even general comments about racism very personally, as if those comments amount to accusations directed specifically at them. I have to wonder why they think that!

I’ve seen a lot of statements that begin with, “I’m so tired of people playing the racism card!” Well, it’s not a card, and it’s not being “played.” It’s a reality that hurts many people! Yet, there may be no stronger denial in the USA than the denial of racism.

Finally, the comments I hear and read build a compelling case that the public outcry really is not about disrespect, but about disagreement. Intolerance of disagreement, or of difference, is one of the fastest growing and most dangerous cultural trends of our time. I guess that’s my primary point in this blog.

What we have lost in our culture is not simply the ability to disagree respectfully; what we have lost is any sense that disagreement can have a positive conclusion. We have lost all sense of unity, replacing it with a demand for uniformity—and not just any uniformity. The demand is that everyone agree and conform with “my/our” perspective.

In the past, I have written often about the growing obsession with “being right”—the arrogant[2] assumption that I/we, and only I/we, are absolutely right; the custodians of absolute truth.

Limited as we are by the clay of which we are made, none of us humans is capable of comprehending absolute truth. Without the humility to accept and acknowledge that my/our perspective is partial and incomplete, and that we need each other’s insights to build consensus (rather than inflicting one perspective) there will never be unity among humans.

Until we stop shouting, and start listening—really listening—to each other, there will always be a need to protest.

I have wished Mr. Kaepernick had chosen a more effective expression of protest—one less counterproductive to his own cause. But, I have to wonder, given the animosity that is infecting more and more of our population, whether it would have been possible for him to find any expression of protest that would have been greeted with a less hostile reaction. I fear that’s what we have become. 

Maybe on our knees is where we all need to be.

That’s the way I see it through the flawed glass that is my world view.

Together in the Walk,

Jim

---

[1] And the owner of the Dallas Cowboys, Jerry Jones, said he would do so, which leads me to wonder whether such firings would be grounds for a viable lawsuit on the basis of violation of first amendment rights.

[2] To assume absolute truth is to assume equal status with God, which not only is arrogant; it’s blasphemous! As I understand the doctrine of original sin, it is related to that assumption.

Keeping the Main Thing the Main Thing

I’m going “off track” today; although, I believe my thoughts written here represent a faithful effort to follow Jesus.

First of all, a few disclaimers; in fact, the disclaimers will make up the majority of my blog today, because (1) the general response to a controversial comment seems to be to find ways to discredit it by making it say something other than what it really says, and I want to do everything in my power to ensure that my statement cannot be twisted and misrepresented. And, (2) my actual statement is relatively short.

The issue is the fiasco surrounding San Francisco Quarterback’s chosen way to protest police brutality against people of color. At the very least, he raises an important issue that needs to be discussed. Unfortunately, his chosen way of expressing his protest has proven counterproductive because virtually 100% of the attention has focused on his method, rather than the content of his concern. The tail is wagging the dog.

So, on to my disclaimers:

·         I sincerely believe that the vast majority of police officers in America are good, well-meaning public servants. The issue being protested relates to a tiny minority within the constabulary. Still, one incident is too many.

·         I do believe racism remains a major concern for the American culture; but, I don’t believe everyone in America is a racist. Most racism is sub-conscious, because virtually everyone agrees that it is evil. So, most racism is suppressed and denied, but is a subtle shaper of interracial interaction.

·         And, yes, I believe that racism is not exclusive; that is, there are racists in every ethnic population.

·         I affirm the statement by D. A. Krôlak, posted in his blog August 25, 2015:

ü  If I say, “Black lives matter,” and you think I mean, “Black lives matter more than others,” we’re having a misunderstanding.

ü  If I say, “White privilege is real and it means White people have some unearned social advantages just because they’re white,” and you think I mean, “White privilege is real and it means White people should be ashamed of themselves just because they’re white,” we’re having a misunderstanding.

ü  If I say, “We have a problem with institutionalized racism in our legal system,” and you think I mean, “We have a problem with everyone being racist in our legal system,” we’re having a misunderstanding.

ü  If we’re having these misunderstandings, where are they coming from, and what can we do about them?

·         The misunderstandings to which Krôlak refers originate in the defensive, self-justifying rationalizations I mention above, viz., the effort to discredit a statement by twisting and misrepresenting it to make it say something other than what it really says.

While that last bullet point represents exactly what I hope to avoid with all my disclaimers, the effort, I suspect, will be futile in many cases. So, I’ll just move on to what I have to say:

Colin Kaepernick’s “peaceful protest” is valid, and he is within his constitutional rights to do it exactly as he did. That being said, aside from raising awareness of his concern, his protest does not seem to have advanced his cause in the least; in fact, his method has become a major distraction from his intention. As for awareness, that’s been done. What we need is not more awareness, but a shift in our mutual understanding of that concern. Too many Americans don’t want to be a united culture. They want to be a uniform culture, with their own perspective being the standard for that uniformity.

Until we come to terms with that need to be the standard for everyone else, it matters not what method we use to protest—or affirm—anything. And even if, for argument’s sake, we affirm the validity of a uniform culture, before we can agree on anything, we must understand each other’s perspective.

That’s the way I see it through the flawed glass that is my world view.

Together in the Walk,

Jim

Lives That Matter

Any time a single group is singled out for anything, a backlash of indignation erupts from other groups. And yet, from time-to-time some specific group—religious, ethnic, cultural, generational, gender—needs special focus for valid reasons. Such special focus usually (sometimes validly and of necessity) becomes relatively exclusive in order to call attention to the specific and critical concerns of that group.

Most recently the “Black Lives Matter” emphasis has caused a stir of backlashes, which in reality confirm the issues that motivated the movement in the first place. The movement is about racism, which for many of us is an undeniable structural reality that is pervasive in America today. The backlash more or less proves that reality.

And yet, there is some validity to the concerns behind the backlash. I don’t have the data, but I sense those concerns are about comparisons and perspectives: how many lives (of any gender or ethnicity) were ended by a peace office shooting an unarmed person, compared to how many peace officers’ lives were ended in the line of duty? And how many lives (of any gender or ethnicity) have been ended by a peace officer validly defending his/her or other lives?

Racism is undeniable (although many continue to deny it, anyway). I struggle daily with the residue of my own racist upbringing. Although I name it as sin, confess it, repent of it and reject it almost daily, I cannot deny that it impacts the way I react internally. I pray that my actions and my words reflect the path I choose, rather than the sin that weighs heavily on my soul. I choose to be active in community efforts to confront racism and to raise awareness; and I pray that my chosen actions and words will not be perceived as paternalistic.

Having confessed the reality of racism, however, I sense an additional demon at work in the testimony/counter-testimony surrounding “Black Lives Matter”. I think there is as general insecurity within Western culture that too often is manifested in a world view that says “The only way I can feel good about myself is to ferret out the shortcomings of others.”

Thus, “Black Lives Matter,” triggers a backlash litany of other lives that also matter. The litany is designed to point out the ethical and moral omissions of a movement that singles out one socio/ethnic group. In a sense it is that insecurity raising its head and whining, “Where’s mine?” At the infamous bottom line, of course, the backlash is a smoke screen devised to distract attention from the racism that is endemic within most human cultures.

The weakness of both the movement and the backlash is that each is reactive rather than pro-active. “Black Lives Matter” is a necessary response to a national crisis; nevertheless, it is reactionary in nature, and thus its effectiveness will be limited at best. The backlash is a predictable, but indefensible reaction that also will be ineffective, if not counterproductive.

What we lack at a national level is a proactive approach to countering racism. I have no illusion that my own ingenuity will produce the ultimate solution; but perhaps I can plant a seed that will be watered and fed and weeded by others who can nurture it to fruitfulness.

How about this as a basic proactive platform from which to deal with human life: “Every Life Matters!” To say that a life matters is not the same as affirming that life; nor is it necessary first to demand that it conform to one’s own standards of right/wrong, good/evil, etc. before it matters. To say that a life matters is not to deny that every life also lives out the consequences of its own choices. 

To say a life matters is to affirm that it has intrinsic value and potential.

To say “Every Life Matters” means, ontologically and a priori:

·         Black lives matter

·         The lives of Police and their families matter

·         The lives of Fire Fighter and their families matter

·         The lives of Emergency Medical Technicians and their families matter

·         The lives of Military personnel and their families matter

·         The lives of Conscientious Objectors matter

·         The lives of medical professionals and paraprofessionals matter

·         LGBT lives matter

·         Heterosexual lives matter

·         Heroic lives matter

·         Cowardly lives matter

·         Native American lives matter

·         Hispanic lives matter

·         Asian lives matter

·         Caucasian lives matter

·         Male lives matter

·         Female lives matter

·         Old lives matter

·         Middle-aged lives matter

·         Young adult lives matter

·         Children’s lives matter

·         Unborn lives matter

·         The lives of children born into poverty matter

·         The lives of the poor matter

·         The lives of the wealthy matter

·         The lives of the educated matter

·         The lives of the uneducated matter

·         The lives of the responsible matter

·         The lives of the irresponsible matter

·         The lives of the employed matter

·         The lives of the unemployed matter

·         The lives of the unemployable matter

·         The lives of employers matter

·         The lives of the healthy matter

·         The lives of the ill matter

·         The lives of the mentally ill matter

·         The lives of the differently abled matter

·         The lives of the strong matter

·         The lives of the weak matter

·         The lives of Pro-Life advocates matter

·         The lives of Pro-Choice advocates matter

·         Politically correct lives matter

·         Politically incorrect lives matter

·         Politically ignorant lives matter

·         Lives representing Free Enterprise matter

·         Lives representing Capitalism matter

·         Lives representing Socialism matter

·         Lives representing Communism matter

·         The lives of the innocent matter

·         The lives of the guilty matter

·         Christian lives matter

·         Jewish lives matter

·         Muslim lives matter

·         Hindu lives matter

·         Shinto lives matter

·         Buddhist lives matter

·         Baha’i lives matter

·         Tao lives matter

·         The lives of Democrats matter

·         The lives of Republicans matter

·         Tea Party lives matter

·         The lives of Libertarians matter

·         The lives of Independents matter

·         Your life matters

·         My life matters

This list of Lives That Matter is offered as a conceptual starting place. I feel relatively certain that other life categories could—and should—be added to the list; and I’m sure that there are those who are poised to pounce upon the list and judge it on the basis of its omissions. So, can we work together to complete the list, so we can get on about the business of building a world of peace, justice and love in which Every Life really Matters?

That’s how I see it through the flawed glass that is my world view.

Together in the Walk,

Jim