Home > Blogs > About Rich's Work > Rich's Blog: Redeeming Hope
Printable Version
Tell a friend
Where is the room for individual dignity?
-
Jul 22, 2008 Posted by Rich Harwood
Most of us never intend to turn someone else into the "other," but the exigencies of life have a way of wringing out individual dignity from our work. We can find ourselves running so fast to reach the finish line that we lose sight of why even started to run. We use certain words and phrases as short-hand, only to lose their meaning. We go all out to win vital arguments, only to create needless divisions that fail to reflect people's everyday experiences. How in your own efforts to create change are you making room for individual dignity?
In my own memory, it was around the time of Ronald Reagan that our nation took a sharp detour deep into the land of celebrating the power of the individual and shoving individual dignity to the side. Of course, the "individual" has always played a central role in American history and myth, but since Reagan we have increasingly viewed the individual as the almighty consumer, the all-knowing political force, the free-agent without commitments, the sovereign entity.
In our celebration of the individual, the reference point is me, myself and I -- even if it means turning away from others, or talking about people in ways that keep them at arms' length.- Thus we talk about "choice" in education, or other reforms, but often do not speak in terms of children and their vulnerabilities and feelings and real needs. The child gets lost in all the political speak and banter, the numbers and charts, the official statements and programs. And yet, we all know what it means to be a kid.
- We talk about long-term health care and
trot out hurting people as props in our
unfolding public drama, but somehow we do not
talk about what a care-giver truly goes
through and the mundane supports that they
need to make it day-to-day. And yet, it's not
too hard to envision yourself in this kind of
situation.
- Or, we talk about patriotism, as I did on Wisconsin Public Radio yesterday, as if its meaning resides within the confines of an ideological framework, a so-called battle between the right and left. And yet, we fail to see that each of us in everyday life is in search of ways to express our love of country, engage with one another, and get on with the unfinished work before us.
A fellow guest on the public radio program yesterday was Air Force Reserve Major David Frakt who in June made the closing argument in a high-profile Guantanamo Bay case. In reading over his closing argument I was especially moved by these words:
No one is "undeserving" of humane treatment. It is an unmistakable lesson of history that when one group of people starts to see another group of people as "other" or as "different," or an "undeserving" as "inferior," ill-treatment inevitably follows.
"Ill-treatment" can be defined in many ways. The Major was referring to torture. But while torture is an extreme example, everyday there are abridgments of individual dignity. Just this morning I heard a radio ad for listeners to donate funds to help "needy people." Just what would it mean to be part of the "needy people?" Must you show an identification card at the movies, wear only certain brands of clothing, attach a scarlet letter to your arm. How is it that we see other people's lives?
I can't imagine that most people intentionally squeeze out room for individual dignity. But I would say that we have lost a certain consciousness for it. If we talk about individual dignity, we do so only for a moment, before returning to business as usual. Or maybe we see something on television that touches on human indignity and makes us cry, only we quickly dry our eyes and "pull ourselves together." The problem we face is hidden in plain view. Will we see it? What will we do?
My point isn't that we should stop fighting for important causes. We must keep going. But under what conditions, I ask? We can achieve our goals but fail to make a difference in people's lives. We can have a great public or social mission but not work truly in the spirit of people. We can be standing right next to someone, and still not see or hear them.
-
Re: Where is the room for individual dignity?
Jul 24, 2008 | alex huber | hubera@mh.state.oh.us
There is a great deal of food for thought here Rich. We talk about the right to “chose” to abort a pregnancy; the right to declare sexual preference but do not talk about how individual decisions affect communities and societies. Is it really helping people to put them into a “needy” category? Has the War On Poverty helped the poor? Has “affirmative action” eliminated inequality? Does the right to refuse treatment or confinement really help the Mentally Ill? What does it do to society? What does all this DO TO society and to “civilization?” Individual Dignity is not the same as individual rights. Dignity flows outward from within to inform character and behavior towards self and others. Dignity is (by definition) responsible. Dignity is self-respect, self-esteem, poise. It is righteous, modest, humble and polite; it is magnificent, distinctive and appropriate. Dignity entails no boundaries; though it can be lost or willingly discarded. Individual Rights are liberties and privileges bestowed. They are granted and guaranteed by the community from without; allowing the individual to function AS THE COMMUNITY INTENDS. Rights always come with boundaries and responsibilities attached. The constitution BESTOWS rights. Societies and communities enact laws, which bestow rights on individuals and set boundaries for the exercise of those rights. Parents set rights and boundaries for their children. (Inalienable rights are those, agreed to by all, as undeniable, indisputable and unchallengeable.) Troubles arise when “having Rights” is confused with “having Dignity.” It is a false assumption to perceive that “rights” can well-up, according to one’s desire, from within the individual, and therefore be a force of nature, inalienable and having no boundaries. Only Dignity can transcend boundaries. Rights are a product of human thought, and as such, they are “defined” – that is: “set with boundaries." The exercise of rights by an individual is always at some expense to, or by permission of, the many.
People talk of “The right to life.” An insect’s life, a fish’s life, a dog’s life, your life, my life is a RIGHT? I think not! LIFE is a gift, free and unbound. The “RIGHT to life” is wrought with conditions: • An insect can live out of doors, but not in my house. • A fish, even if it were able to declare its right to life in air and muster a thousand fish to support it, can still only live in water. • Dogs are “allowed” to live with us as long as they are good companions and do our bidding. • You and I have the gift of life; but our “right to life” is fragile, and depends on whether we adhere to the rules of Nature and Man – and whether other men adhere to the same rules. So let us not be drawn to advocate for RIGHTS when we really want to be fostering DIGNITY; and let us not stifle dignity when we advocate for rights! And let us be granted the vision, the patience and the wisdom to sort out the difference.