On Race

Karen and I went to see the movie Selma this weekend.  It seemed to be the right thing to do for MLK Day.  At various times in my life I have looked closely at the history of the civil rights movement and have always found it to be a powerful experience.  Who can watch footage of the Freedom Rides, the sit-ins or the marches and not be awed by the courage of the participants, outraged by the hatred and violence of their antagonists and shamed by the pathetic cowardice of the ‘good citizens’.

Like every nation, our nation has a legacy of disgraceful deeds.  Slavery and our treatment of Native Americans are at the top of the list.  The sad travails of our Native American citizens are not often brought to our attention, so our misdeeds in this area are more or less hidden from view.  However, the ramifications of slavery are ever present.

For many years the legacy of slavery was expressed in clear outright unlawful treatment of blacks – segregation and the active prevention of voting being the most egregious.  The civil rights movement and the resultant legislation (Civil Rights Act and Voting Act) had dramatic impact in these areas.  Blacks in great numbers have now achieved financial success, education at the best institutions, and prominence in politics, business, sports and entertainment fields.  Most of my baby boomer friends have shed the biases of their younger years, if they had them, and the generation of my children seems to have completely rejected racial stereotypes.

Will race ever not be an issue?  Will the world ever be color blind?  I would say no, just as the world will never be blind to height or beauty or hair color.  One’s race is a human feature that is noticeable.  The best we can hope for is that the recognition of race does not carry with it stereotypes, especially not negative ones; that we will judge each person individually.

But the effects of two hundred years of slavery linger on in many ways, and these are not ameliorated nearly as easily as basic rights were.  African Americans still lag behind the rest of the U.S. in education, income, home ownership and lifespan.  Additionally, negative attributes like the breakdown of the family, incarceration rate and single parent rate are much higher in their population.  Other race issues such as racial profiling, unequal treatment under the law and more subtle forms of racial discrimination are certainly still occurring.  The problem is that all of these are generally not issues for legislative action, but rather involve a cultural evolution on both sides that is progressing very slowly and not always in a positive direction.

The recent series of police shootings of unarmed black men, along with the Zimmerman shooting in Florida, have spawned a new militancy in the long dormant civil rights movement.  There is a strong perception among blacks that the lives of their young men are somehow considered disposable or at least less important than those of other citizens.  These events have also resurfaced the nagging questions of why blacks are still looking in from outside on many of the desired opportunities in our society.  Black voices are demanding fairer treatment by law enforcement and better opportunities in education and the workforce.

Many people are sympathetic with these voices and wish that something ‘could be done’ to fix these problems, but generally don’t know what that ‘something’ could be.  Others feel that blacks are ‘playing the race card’ and using it as an excuse for their own failings.  They believe that the culprits are the breakdown of the black family, drugs and a youth culture that tends to celebrate violence, misogyny and a rejection of societal values.

The police shootings are an example of how polarized our society is in danger of becoming.  Is there hope for a slow reconciliation of these views and a positive move toward better understanding?  Is there hope that the frequency of such tragedies will decrease?

Clearly, no reasonable person wants an unarmed man to be killed by police even if they have committed a crime.  But can we say that the police are never justified in shooting an unarmed man?  No, of course not.  The policeman’s job is very challenging with a constant potential for injury or death.  Historically, the benefit of the doubt has been given to the police, though it should certainly not be done without careful consideration of the events.  It is a dual responsibility of both the citizen and the policeman to avoid situations that escalate out of control or that cause a policeman to believe he is in mortal danger.  There are certainly cases where policeman have provoked that escalation.  But there are also times when unarmed individuals have made poor choices that resulted in their deaths.

Are young black men treated differently than any other group?  Yes, probably so.  Some would argue that there is justification for this profiling, and it is also difficult to know how much different the treatment of blacks is than of any other group in a high crime area.

No law can completely dictate police behavior.  Rules of engagement are already in place and must continue to be refined.  But in the end, there is an unwritten social contract between the people and the police that must be respected by both sides.  Heightened awareness on both sides due to the recent cases may contribute to a better future result.  And certainly the continuing integration of police forces will also help.  Let us hope so.

On the subject of how much racism and prejudice still exists in our society and how to eradicate it, I must again point to how polarized the existing views have become.  Are there racial stereotypes?  Of course!  Are blacks treated unfairly in the workplace and in education?  That is a more difficult question.

There is no doubt that predominantly black schools are more likely to be less ideal for education than predominantly white ones.  Is it because they receive less funds?  Funding is provided by the school district, and certainly school districts that are poorer will have less funding.  But is this a major disadvantage?  It is likely that the vicious cycle of poverty begetting poverty is more to blame than actual funding differences. Poor families, and especially single parent poor families, have less time, resources and education than wealthier families.  Less family support and resources, more violence and disruptive behavior in the neighborhood and in the school, and all of the other crushing burdens of being poor conspire to create a very challenging environment for education.

In the area of income and job opportunities, it seems to me that the black community is again at a distinct disadvantage because of the legacy of poverty and slavery.  But social and economic justice is a complex matter that cannot be corrected with the stroke of a pen.  Every impoverished community struggles to find a way to advance out of poverty, whether white, black, Hispanic or even Asian.  It is a sad truth of our 21^st century world that the gap between rich and poor is growing even in developed nations.

Do black Americans still face discrimination?  It would be presumptuous of me to say no, and I am sure that discrimination still occurs in both direct and subtle ways.  But I do not believe that discrimination itself is the most daunting barrier to progress, and more importantly, an activism that focuses on racial issues will increasingly receive a skeptical hearing and a deaf ear from the American public.  The battle must be fought on the field of economic gains for the working class – better vocational education, more jobs and higher paying jobs.  This is an agenda that can be embraced by every American of every race or ethnic background and both ends of the political spectrum.

Thoughts on Charlie

 Like most of the rest of the world I was horrified and terribly saddened by the events in Paris.  It is difficult to comprehend the motivations behind such heinous acts, but sadly the propensity in the human race for violence is a long established fact.

The first question is whether Charlie Hebdo can in any way be held responsible for its fate because of its highly irreverent and often mocking cartoons.  I categorically reject this idea and I cast my lot with those who declare ‘Je suis Charlie’.  One of the pillars and best accomplishments of modern civilization is freedom of expression.  There are, of course, certain limits such as child pornography or incitement to violence, but the great majority of censorship is a slippery slope to the type of society that we spent centuries evolving away from.  One may be disgusted, incensed or insulted by the written, spoken or visual, and it is only human to react in outrage or pain or anger, but there is no circumstance that justifies violence as a response.

The second question that will resound in the coming weeks and months will be whether a free, open and diverse society can maintain its principles in the wake of such threats.  Can those who are susceptible to the appeal of jihadist violence be identified and deterred without compromising the rights of innocent people?  Of course there is no such thing as absolute freedom, and the requirements for providing security will ultimately prevail over the protection of some rights, though certainly not without a tinge of sadness for what has been sacrificed.

There will be many who will condemn Islam itself for the acts of some of its followers, pointing to various sections in the Koran or to polls or to the Fatwahs issued by certain Imams over recent years.  I do not agree with this overall condemnation.  Any student of history or religion can point out a multitude of violent and brutal acts committed by Christians and Jews over the centuries or in the biblical past.  The Old Testament (or Torah) is full of violence, wars and even genocide.  Much like the Koran, it dictates brutal punishments for a broad spectrum of religious and sexual crimes.  For example, false prophecy, blasphemy and breaking the Sabbath were all punishable by death under the laws of the Torah.  In Christianity, those who were perceived to be blasphemous or heretics were burned at the cross or worse.  Be assured that Charlie Hebdo would not have survived its first printing in the Europe of medieval times or the Reformation.  The Crusades and the killing fields of the Thirty Years War are an example of how easily religion can be transformed into an excuse to kill and pillage.

What is different between Judeo-Christian religion and Islam is that for the most part, liberalizing influences have caused Judaism and Christianity, much older religions than Islam, to reject their violent orthodoxies.  That is not to say that Jews and Christians have lost their penchant for violence, but merely that it is no longer justified in religious terms, other than in the ‘just war’ theory.

Will liberalizing influences have a similar effect on Islam in the long run?  No one can predict the future, but certainly a good argument can be made that eventually Islam will also abandon its more radical laws and re-interpret the Koran and the life of Mohammed.  Indeed, there is an excellent book that does just that and gives a very illuminating view of the impact of Mohammed and Islam on the world – No God But God by Reza Aslan.  The general condemnation of the Paris acts by a great preponderance of Muslim leaders is also a good sign that for many Muslims there is a desire to move forward to a more accepting and peaceful coexistence with the liberalized west.

But unfortunately there are many complex underlying problems that may perhaps curtail the liberalization of Islam.  The sense of Islam being persecuted and the travails of the Middle East and Israel/Palestine create an environment that tends to radicalize rather than liberalize.  A group that feels it is being maligned and oppressed often finds unity in dogma, patriotism and fundamentalism rather than in openness and thoughtful dialogue.  Young men and women who are seeking identity and romantic ideals have always been susceptible to the cynical manipulation of radical leaders.

In this sense it is important for the international community to energetically address the alienation of Muslim youth in western countries as well as the continuing strife and chaos in the Middle East.

In the short term must have hope on two levels:  One, that our combined efforts in international intelligence and cooperation will deter future attacks of this nature.  And two, that the Muslim world will unite in its efforts to divert its youth from hatred and violence.

Das Ewig-Weibliche Zieht Uns Hinan! Or does it?

I became fascinated by German literature and philosophy in college, spent my junior year at a German university and ended up getting a B.A. in German along with my engineering degree.  I enjoyed reading many different German authors and poets, but Goethe is my favorite.

Goethe’s opus magnum is the poetic drama Faust, the classic interpretation of the Faustian bargain with the devil.  It is a complex work that spanned much of his life.  He completed it shortly before his death.

At the end of the drama, Faust’s soul should have been given over to Mephistopheles according to the pact he made, but instead he is redeemed and ascends to heaven as a mystical choir sings the final lines:

Alles Vergängliche ist nur ein Gleichnis

Das Unzulängliche, hier wird‘s Ereignis

Das Unbeschreibliche, hier ist‘s getan

Das Ewig-Weibliche zieht uns hinan

In English:

Everything transitory

is only an allegory;

the unachievable

here comes to pass;

the indescribable,

is here accomplished;

the Eternal Feminine

draws us aloft.

There are of course many interpretations of this final quatrain, but perhaps the most intriguing part of it is the concept of the Eternal Feminine.

I believe that Goethe, as a romantic, was convinced that the best qualities of humanity were exemplified in women - nobility of character, self-sacrificing love, gentleness and strength of spirit, forgiveness.  Indeed it was Gretchen, the young woman whom Faust had seduced and ruined, whose love and forgiveness intercedes on Faust’s behalf in providing for his redemption.

The romantic ideal of womanhood has been a common thread in literature and poetry.  Its contrast to the brutal masculine world provided an image of purity and compassion that could be offered as a goal in the savage reality of a world filled with wars, disasters and merciless competition.

But the sad irony of this romanticism was its tendency to keep women in ‘their place’ as symbols, protecting them from the brutality of normal life by preventing their participation in any meaningful way.  To keep the feminine ideal pure and unsullied, men put it on a pedestal, but rarely allowed the ideal to have any influence in their lives or habits.

There is condescension and hypocrisy inherent in the creation of ideals and symbols.  The ‘noble savage’, for example, was supposedly a respected symbol of a simpler world where men were untainted by the corrupting influence of so-called civilization.  Native Americans were glorified by some poets and writers in this way, but we all know how that story ended.  Mankind has a long history of paying lip service to ideals but totally ignoring them or even opposing them in day-to-day living.

A similar fate awaited the romantic concept of the ‘eternal feminine’.  Women were treated with great reverence, but little respect.  Their honor was protected at all costs, but their opinions and contributions were rejected or belittled.  Rather than seeing their opportunities to influence society grow, women found that their exalted state bound them in ever tighter bonds of irrelevance.

The romantic spirit began to fade by mid 19^th century and unsentimental, materialistic philosophies began to dominate the thought landscape.  Marxism and capitalism spawned their own ideals with antithetical goals, but very similar hard edges of idealized behavior.  Strength, ruthlessness and cunning were paramount - hardly the eternal feminine ideal!

By the beginning of the 20^th century, women began to vigorously claim their own place in the evolution of society, demonstrating their capacity for scholarship, labor and political influence.  In order to achieve this equality, women found it expedient to shatter the romantic feminine ideal and compete in a man’s world, embracing the masculine ethic.  If becoming an executive or a political leader required a remorseless competitive spirit, then so be it.  If an inclination toward compassion or diplomacy was seen as feminine weakness, then it must be abandoned.  If emotional expressions were not acceptable at the top, then a cold, controlled demeanor must be adopted.  If being the vulnerable victim in sexual affairs narrowed one’s options, then the answer was to switch the tables and become as emotionally indifferent and manipulative as the males.

So as we enter the year 2015 instead of the eternal feminine drawing us upward, we find that women, to some extent, have been coopted by the masculine reality. The romantic in me hopes that this is a temporary cloaking of the ideal rather than a true metamorphosis of the feminine into the masculine, and that the eventual equal, interaction of men and women as true partners in our civilization will produce a spiritual awakening of love, compassion, forgiveness and cooperation.