Home > About Rich's Work > Rich's Blog: Redeeming Hope
Printable Version
Tell a friend
-
The State of Our Union - Listening to Nobody
I watched President Bush and Governor Kaine last night in total shock and awe. Surely, they can’t believe the American people buy what they’re peddling. And members of Congress who keep howling and standing and clapping, surely they must know their posturing is silly. What about the real America?
There were three phrases that framed last night’s speeches: “There is no honor in retreat;” America is a “hopeful society;” and there is “no higher calling than serving others.” Wow! Too bad each of these phrases was maligned, abused, mangled, and appropriated.
The problem is this: I’ve crisscrossed the nation now six times in the last 15 years, and these three phrases, as they were used, simply distort people’s reality. Let’s take each phrase one at a time:- “There is no
honor in retreat” – true enough. This
phrase framed a huge portion of the
president’s message. Unfortunately, much of
America is in retreat. As I’ve outlined in
Hope Unraveled, Americans have told me
that over the last 15 years they have retreated
from public life and politics into close-knit
circles of family and friends. They have done
so because they feel their reality is not
reflected in public life and politics and that
it is often purposefully distorted by, among
others, politicians seeking their own gain.
The phrase, “There is no honor in retreat” should have applied here at home. In fact, it reminded me of when someone turns a phrase on you in an argument – trying to get the upper hand. Last night the president should have engaged Americans in a conversation about how we can reverse our own retreat – here at home. - America is a “hopeful society” – not
in the way this phrase distorted people’s
reality last night. In many respects,
people’s hope has greatly diminished over the
past 15 years or so. Too much “false hope”
is peddled in our society – overblown
expectations, inflated achievements,
unrealistic timelines, and manufactured heroes.
Americans want to be hopeful – but that will
require reflecting their reality, engaging them
on a purposeful path, and acknowledging the
real challenges they face in their daily lives.
People will not be hopeful simply because we proclaim that they are, or because there is a litany of new proposals on the table. Understanding people’s reality, accurately reflecting it, and showing how one’s ideas relate to that reality are all necessary steps to move forward. Few of these could be heard last night. - “There is no higher calling than serving
others” – yes, but too bad that neither the
president nor the governor really talked about
this. They discussed what government needs to
do, what the private sector needs to do, but
never really what each of us as citizens need
to do. Let’s face it; there was no higher
calling last night. Instead, the call went out
that each of us should expect to get all we
want, when we want it, all at a low cost –
and with good, government efficiency!
A hopeful society, a society not in retreat – these require each of us to step up and engage as citizens, to think about our common challenges, to consider how we each must contribute, to see how we are inextricably connected to one another.
I know that Americans want a hopeful society. They believe they must not be in retreat. And they also believe that serving others is a higher calling. So why don’t we start to truly act on those sentiments?
What did you think of the speeches last night? I’d love to hear your thoughts. - “There is no
honor in retreat” – true enough. This
phrase framed a huge portion of the
president’s message. Unfortunately, much of
America is in retreat. As I’ve outlined in
Hope Unraveled, Americans have told me
that over the last 15 years they have retreated
from public life and politics into close-knit
circles of family and friends. They have done
so because they feel their reality is not
reflected in public life and politics and that
it is often purposefully distorted by, among
others, politicians seeking their own gain.
-
The State of Our Union - Questions to Consider
Tonight the president and a Democratic counterpart, Gov. Tim Kaine of Virginia, will offer a State of the Union Address. At issue: simply more politics, or a message that engages the American people? Here are four questions for you to use in watching tonight. They come from my travels across the country. I urge you to watch, think about these questions, and log back on to share your thoughts.- Do you believe the president and the Democratic leader are in pursuit of truth? Do you feel the leaders tonight are genuinely seeking to be forthright, to reflect people’s reality and what we must do to move ahead and the potential costs? Or, are they somehow distorting, or playing with the truth for their own gain? (Read "In Search of Truth")
- Do you believe the president and the Democratic leader ask us to see one another? In what ways do the leaders ask us to see the concerns and aspirations of others in our society, especially those different from ourselves? Specifically, what do they ask us to see and know? (Read "Who among us do we see?")
- Do you believe the president and the Democratic leader ask us to consider a richer definition of happiness? Do the leaders entice us to step forward merely as individual consumers in the pursuit of our own happiness? Or, do they call us back to public life in order to consider the greater common good, or just our own good – and, if so, how? (Read "The Pursuit of Happiness")
- Do you believe the president and the Democratic leader set the right tone? Do the words and images they use tonight reflect a genuine engagement with people’s concerns, or are they seeking to divide people, improve their poll numbers, or play on the Red/Blue divide? (Read "Do Political Leaders Care?")
What is our real “State of the Union?” I look forward to reading your thoughts and continuing the conversation.
-
The State of Our Union – The Pursuit of Happiness
The notion of personal sovereignty is an enormously powerful idea – and a potentially dangerous one. It signals to us that we as individuals can go our own way, do our own thing, and be our own person. Or, as the U.S. Army used to say, “Be all you can be!”
The idea is deeply embedded in the current definition of consumerism that has grabbed hold of the American imagination. Nowadays we consumers expect to get what we want, when we want it, at the highest quality and the lowest cost – and if we don’t like something, we can return it without any questions asked.
Self-fulfillment has been part of the American landscape since our nation’s founding. But I often wonder if Jefferson had the same notion of the “pursuit of happiness” when he wrote that phrase into the Declaration of Independence as we do today. As we all know, Jefferson had a strong belief in the role of “informed citizens” in society. Take apart that phrase and you end up with two key ideas: individuals who see themselves as more than free-lancing consumers and who make it their business to be engaged in the larger society around them.
Today, the phrase “pursuit of happiness” is often the clarion call for individual self-fulfillment, at times without any regard to the larger society. Indeed, we are being socially groomed to expect to come into the public square and make claims and demands for our own interests without concern for others. But this pursuit only leads us to hyper-individualism, self-absorption, even selfishness.
As Americans repeatedly pointed out in my new book, Hope Unraveled: The People’s Retreat and Our Way Back, too many of us are free-lancing our way through society, allowing our love affair with consumerism and personal sovereignty to crowd out the necessary time and space to be attached to public life and politics. We have retreated into close-knit circles of families and friends, often simply to pursue individual happiness.
I remember as I was traveling the country in recent years and talking with Americans, I would ask people to give me a motto for their community and the nation. One person said to me, “I’ve got mine and to heck with you.” Another said, “I’m for me and you’re for you!” And still another person gave me this one, “I’m for me and you’re for me!”
Perhaps it goes without saying that over any extended stretch of time it is impossible for people to go it alone – even with the most remarkable circle of family and friends. The webs of entanglement in our interdependent lives will sooner or later stare us in the face. Our jobs, our safety, our schools, our health care, our very quality of life are all inextricably intertwined.
People are by nature social animals. There is an emptiness that we all encounter when we peel ourselves away from others and choose to go it alone. We all know that in our heart of hearts. No consumer product or vacation home or gated wall can protect us from that universal truth.
People who have been part of something larger than themselves will tell you that they gained from those experiences an incredible sense of belonging, a deeper belief in the power of people to act together, and even a sense of happiness. And while their happiness may have been tied to some personal achievement, they will almost always say that it was also a result of their connection to others.
Like I said, personal sovereignty has always been part of the American experience; but that alone will not create the pathway for each of us being better people or to creating a better society.
So, I would ask each of us to consider this question: What does happiness really mean to each of us and where can we find it? And what is the relationship of our answer to the state of the union?
The phrase “state of the union” suggests that there is a coming together of disparate pieces – some of those pieces are our 50 states, others are comprised of we the people as individuals. As the president’s State of the Union Address approaches, I would ask him to ask us to step forward as more than individual consumers in the pursuit of own happiness. It’s time to call ourselves back to public life – and to each other. And I would ask each of us to think about Jefferson’s words, and realize that greater personal happiness will come by being part of stronger communities and a stronger nation.
Personal sovereignty cannot fulfill our deepest wants.
-
The State of Our Union - Who among us do we see?
As our society fragments and people retreat into close-knit circles of family and friends, we must wrestle with a fundamental question.
The question is where do we fit, and thus who among us do we see? Right now, many of us believe we fit into close-knit circles, along with others who are similar to us. When people come together, it is often for the purpose of pursuing their pre-set agenda, without even considering at times the views or needs or aspirations of others.
We can go about our lives and almost be able to shut everything and everyone out that we do not want to see.
Who among us do we see? This is, at its essence, a Biblical question from the prophets, and it still calls us today.
I have been thinking about this question more and more as I travel the country and listen to people’s stories and try to find meaningful approaches for creating an alternate path for our public life and politics.
We are up against some powerful forces. Our economy has gone global and so too have many of its jobs. Many of us are more “connected” globally than ever before. In fact, just a week or so ago, I was talking with someone from San Jose who noted that some people in that region seem more concerned with happenings in India than they do with people who live around the corner.
Another concern is the increasing fragmentation of the news. Now, many people simply seek out the niche news broadcast (such as FOX or CNN), the niche talk radio program, and the niche print publication that affirms their existing views. Indeed, many of us are aggregating our own news through these various sources and through customized on-demand Internet services. It all adds up to being able to hear and watch and see only those things you want to know about and to bypass those stories, events and issues that make one uncomfortable, or challenge our chosen worldview.
And yet, Yeats put it well when he wrote that to be a whole person we must engage with the “necessary other” – the other voice, the other perspective, the other hope… the other person.
Isn’t this what the response to 9/11 and the recent Gulf Coast disaster called us to do – respond to someone and something different from ourselves? If we are to understand and act on such challenges as inadequate public schools, or poverty, or hatred and bigotry, we must see others – to understand their plight, to figure out a new path, to bring ourselves to act. How else can we know about matters beyond ourselves?
I have come to believe that one of our greatest challenges today is that we have closed off ourselves to others, especially to others who are different from us. Our fragmentation, our lack of trust in politics, our retreat from public life, has left us disconnected.
If we are to imagine and act for the public good, which is what I believe we must come to do if we are to address our core concerns, then we must find ways to bridge the divides that have been created in our modern life.
The resources are there – we can put the Internet to good use by transcending boundaries rather than deepening existing dividing lines; we can pursue civic engagement efforts – like those The Harwood Institute has done in Mobile or Orlando – that enable people to see beyond themselves and into the lives of others; we can create new boundary spanning organizations, as evidenced by the Institute’s work with the Nevada Community Foundation, so that there are positive forces within communities to break down walls and work across silos.
We will not reverse the powerful conditions that are reshaping our society; advances in technology will always be with us, and globalization continues to march on. Instead of fighting against these changes, we must marshal these forces, along with our own creativity and resources, to shape the kind of public life and politics we all seek.
But let us be clear: neither these forces nor our own abilities can be marshaled from within the walls of our close-knit circles. Rather, we must seek to know and understand “the necessary other” beyond ourselves, learning from their experiences and teaching from our own. Every voice, including our own, brings power to public life, but we cannot hear that which we do not wish to know.
Tomorrow: Where is our pursuit of “happiness” leading us? -
The State of Our Union – Do Political Leaders Care?
Today, to what extent do we believe our political leaders care about the state of our union? And how would we ever know given their hyperbolic rhetoric and constant need to draw attention to themselves?
In the past few weeks alone we have witnessed a collection of political gyrations that makes one head spin with dismay and turn our stomachs sick. The examples come from both political parties – there is no red/blue divide on this matter!
Take, for instance, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s remarks at an MLK Day service at Canaan Baptist Church of Christ in Harlem at which she used the word “plantation” to describe how the House of Representatives is run.
Or, how about Mayor C. Ray Nagin’s remarks about the plight and future of New Orleans, saying that God wants New Orleans to be a “chocolate city” and that the recent hurricanes are because “God is mad at America.”
Then there is the constant drumbeat of incredulous responses to the Jack Abramoff scandal. Now swearing off the capturing of questionable donations and support, leaders of both political parties are in a new bidding war: Who can look toughest in reigning in political shenanigans.
The Democrats, God bless their souls, even gathered last Wednesday in the Great Hall of the Library of Congress for a photo op where they signed their very own “Democratic Declaration: Honest Leadership, Open Government.” Are they serious?
Their get-together reminded me of the time when Democrats and Republicans gathered on the steps of the Congress in the aftermath of 9/11 in a show of unity, when they held hands and sang God Bless America. At the time we were told that their political conduct would become more bipartisan and less acrimonious. Look at where we are now.
I’m also reminded of how the Democrats tried to play gotcha with Judge Samuel Alito. The hearings did little to help Americans sort through the meaning of a court now being reconfigured, but it did help remind people why they dislike politics so much.
And, yes, there’s the incredible attack on Rep. John Murtha’s forthrightness as some Republicans have questioned the two Purple Heart medals he was awarded in service to the nation. This whole fiasco is hard to believe. Here is man who people on both sides of the aisle respect and even adore. And yet, the attacks persist.
In my book Hope Unraveled: The People’s Retreat and Our Way Back, it’s clear that people believe that political leaders understand only one thing: their own positioning. There is a huge disconnect between leaders and people’s daily reality – their concerns, their hopes, even their love for their country.
Indeed, the rhetoric we hear from our political leaders not only bears little relationship to people’s lives, it distorts their very reality and cheapens our political discourse. It reflects a belief among leaders that the only way they will be heard is to ramp up their ridiculous-sounding sound bites, go on the attack, and stage photo ops. My sense is that they believe everyone does it, so why shouldn’t they; that they are carrying on the “good fight” for their cause; and that everyone knows that they really don’t mean everything they say – “It’s just politics!”
I have come away from my ongoing trips across America – six times in the last 15 years or so – believing that people do care about what gets said in our politics and public life. And the current tone and shape of our political discourse has a silent corrosive effect on our body politic. For people are in search of a sense of coherence about a rapidly-changing world and a sense of possibility about how we can build a better society. What our leaders say and do matters.
So, our political leaders need to know that their conduct suggests that they do not care about the state of our union and that their only concern is their own success. Perhaps this isn’t so, but that’s what we are left to believe. There is no red/blue divide on this matter – only a pox on both of their houses.
Tomorrow: How willing are we to see people different from ourselves? -
The State of Our Union – In Search of Truth
To what extent do we as a society value truth today – and when is escapism okay, and when does it undermine our need to square with reality? What is the state of our union when it comes to truth?
In recent days, we have heard much hoopla about James Frey’s best-selling memoir A Little Million Pieces, in which he fabricated part of his personal story. Beyond the outcry, some people, like his publisher and Oprah Winfrey, have stood by the work.
Or, take the incredible proliferation of television realty shows, which now dominate air waves. Shows like “Extreme Makeover” suggest to us that anything goes – you can change your clothes, your hair, even your God-given features, all in an attempt to be someone you’re not.
It’s hard to even know nowadays what’s news and what’s opinion, with so-called “journalists” becoming more and more willing to mix their own views into broadcasts, hype stories for ratings, and preferring to talk about issues with a panel of fellow journalists rather than people those issues affect on a daily basis.
These examples, along with countless television ads, political campaigns and other efforts all routinely play on the edge of truth. They blur the lines between fact and fiction – and in doing so they cheapen our notion of the truth and diminish our ability to understand and reflect reality.
But don’t despair – not is all lost. There are examples of an alternative.
Take the potent news story by Kurt Eichenwald of The New York Times, who wrote back on Dec.19 about Justin Berry, then 18, and his drug use and pornographic Webcam business. For years, Berry had led a secret life of selling pictures of his sexual acts over the Internet. Eichenwald’s telling of this story was moving and insightful. Indeed, in print and online he walked readers through how he developed and reported the story, clearly illuminating the ethical dilemmas he faced and how he handled them. His goal: make as much of the murky truth transparent as possible.
All this leads me to the word “truthiness,” which the American Dialect Society dubbed word of the year for 2005. The word was popularized by former Daily Show correspondent Steven Colbert on his new show The Colbert Report. It refers to the quality of preferring concepts or facts one wishes to be true, rather than concepts or facts known to be true.
We search out truthiness when truthfulness cannot be found.
In my recent book, Hope Unraveled: The People’s Retreat and Our Way Back, I reported that people have retreated from politics and public life because they don’t feel their reality is reflected and that too often it is purposefully distorted by those seeking their own gain (such as the news media, political leaders, and others).
In this regard, we are all caught in a bind. On the one hand we want and need our reality to be reflected in order to feel that our concerns and aspirations are understood; so we can muster a sense of coherence over our fast-changing world; and so that it’s possible for society to try and take effective action on our concerns. On the other hand, increasingly we feel that our reality is distorted, so we find ourselves in search of ways to mitigate that frustration and give ourselves a sense of comfort.
So, along comes a new television reality series by ABC called “Miracle Workers.” Imagine this: seriously ill people who have neither the contacts nor the funds to get necessary medical care will be selected by ABC to work with a team of health care professionals.
But here is a dilemma for us. As we watch the small handful of people who get care, what about the 40 million Americans who remain without health care or the many more Americans who simply struggle day-to-day with high co-payments or drug costs? As we watch such programs, will we somehow come to believe that we as a society are really addressing our health care problems? Do such programs give us the sense that we’re off the hook, as such television programs neatly provide a nice resolution to the ills of these individuals? Will we believe that taking action within our society should be as easy as on the TV screen?
So what? Will we next create similar television programs (or even policy efforts) where we watch as individual public schools get “fixed;” or a handful of poor folks climb their way out of poverty; or a few aging baby boomers take on new civic roles after retirement, somehow suggesting that all baby boomers are doing their part?
In my crisscrossing the nation six times over the past fifteen years or so, I have found that we Americans yearn for something more honest, more truthful, and more representative of our reality. It doesn’t mean we don’t like gossip or great TV drama – we do. But there is more to our individual lives than that – and there is much more to our common public life. Indeed, there is a need to understand and reflect our reality even while we pursue our fantasies.
Tomorrow: the role our political leaders play in our state of the union.