Empathy

One of the most important human attributes is empathy.  The dictionary definition is ‘the ability to understand and share the feelings of others’.  Empathy is the primary means for people to make progress in resolving their differences.  If you cannot understand what another person is feeling, then it is almost impossible to reach out to them in a way that will bridge the gap.  If you have no empathy, then your only means of interaction is to attempt to dominate or overwhelm your adversary and make them subject to your way of thinking.

Unfortunately, showing empathy is not an accepted attribute of leadership.  Empathy requires an admission of the ambiguity and nuance of human affairs.  Most people are not comfortable with ambiguity.  They crave certainty.  That is why demagogues are so successful.

One of the reasons I have found Obama such an incredibly appealing President and person is that he has a very strong inclination toward empathy.  He does not outright condemn other cultures or countries or even political views, and he tries to put other opinions into perspective and give them respect.  Many people see this as weakness.  They accuse him of going on apology tours and weakening the status of the U.S. in the world.

When people think of a strong leader, they equate strength with absolute conviction and dramatic declarations.  To be sure, when a country is facing a desperate situation and at the brink of destruction, strong leadership of this nature with no hint of doubt or hesitation is necessary.  The belief that any show of softness or empathy would demonstrate weakness and invite more aggression is reasonable and must be considered in such situations.

But leadership in this era of globalization and rapid change is no longer simply a matter of standing strong against an implacable foe. The world is integrated as never before and we can no longer afford to lead by posturing as the world’s only moral nation, as a people who are never wrong and have no weaknesses or failings.  We must acknowledge and comprehend the diversity in this world by empathizing with others, understanding their point of view, even when we do not necessarily agree with it.

We accept and celebrate empathy when it is in a religious leader like the Pope or the Dalai Lama.  But would it not be just as appropriate for a political leader who is engaging with other nations and peoples?  Isn’t it time for these leaders to project a moral and ethical message that is honest and thoughtful? 

Within our own land we see so many missed opportunities for empathy and it is at the core of our fractious political life.  Can I as a progressive not empathize with those who are frightened by the changing fabric of our society, who see their old world disappearing?  Is it so hard to empathize with the plight of those whose jobs have fled overseas and feel anger at the smug attitudes of the so-called liberal elite?  Conversely, can those on the right not empathize with African-Americans who are stymied by intractable poverty and hopelessness, and outraged by the parade of videos clearly showing tragic, unnecessary shootings of unarmed young men?  And can African-Americans not empathize with the incredibly challenging situations that police in urban settings face on a daily basis, whether black or white? 

If people could start with empathy, acknowledging the fears, concerns and hopes of their adversaries, avoiding the simplistic labeling that constructs a deep chasm – racist, elitist, xenophobe, socialist, sexist, radical – and carefully analyze problems with data and an open mind, then perhaps we could get past the entrenched ideological stalemate that seems to have gripped our country.

Reflection on the Election

Like many of my friends, and indeed perhaps half of the nation, I was in shock and depression after the Trump victory.  I felt a bit of apprehension before it occurred, but I discounted the close polling as somehow reflective only of the normal liberal conservative divide, and believed that many of the conservatives would in the end find it impossible to vote for a man such as Donald Trump, even if they could not vote for Clinton.  I was wrong.

So what does it all mean and how will things go on from here?  Much has been written about how Trump managed to win over so many white voters.  Upon reflection it seems fairly simple to me.  One portion of the Trump supporters embraced him as an unapologetic voice against progressive values.  They want immigration trends reversed and illegal immigrants deported; they believe African-Americans must take responsibility for their own problems; they believe climate change is a left wing conspiracy; they think Obama has weakened the US in international affairs; they want to roll back entitlements; and they want to eliminate Obamacare.

These are the people that would have voted for any republican nominee, even an axe-murderer.  They would not be deterred by major character flaws in their candidate, no matter how egregious they might be.  Indeed, the flamboyant and bellicose character of Trump excited them and whipped them into a frenzy of giving the middle finger to the ‘system’ and voicing a newfound joy of political incorrectness!

The other large group of Trump supporters crossed over from the labor union side of the democratic party.  They were seduced by Trump’s claim to know how to ‘fix’ the economy.  Out of desperation, they were ready to be true believers.  And sadly, they too found the racist, xenophobic, and even the misogynistic rantings of Trump somewhat appealing.  They had previously embraced liberal leaders only because the democrats had established themselves as the friend of labor.  The sad state of the middle class in the current economy severed those bonds and left them adrift where they were easy prey for a demagogue.  Disruption is inevitable in times of transition.

The last group, smaller but decisive, was the independents who held their noses and voted for Trump because they had become convinced that Hillary Clinton was not to be trusted and they believed the false (in my opinion) equivalencies drawn between Trump and Clintons’ flaws, transgressions and character.  The Hillary hate campaign was incredibly effective in this regard.

Combine all of this with a heavy dose of apathy in the African American community – almost a sense of fatalism – and voila, Trump wins!

There are many potential ramifications of this result.  With a republican congress generally supporting him, Trump can impact a lot of things fairly quickly – immigration, energy and environmental policy, financial regulations and some foreign policy decisions (Iran, Syria, Cuba).  We can only hope that the damage is temporary and not cataclysmic.

But ironically, the most important issue for his supporters, and the one that really powered Trump into the White House – the economy – will likely be much more resistant to change.  Even if he is able to enact tariffs on certain trading partners – and this is not something that the congress will necessarily greet with enthusiasm, free trade being a long-held Republican ideal – their impact could very possibly be negative rather than positive, i.e. make consumer goods more expensive without bringing back jobs.

People are generally clueless about the economy.  It is simply too complex for the average citizen to understand in any deep way.  Even the most respected economists differ greatly on how to address macroeconomic issues.  A country is VERY different from a business.  The belief that Trump’s success as a businessman, which is certainly not a universally-accepted fact in itself, will translate into success for the national economy is simplistic almost to the point of self-delusion.  The last much-heralded titan of business who entered the White House was Herbert Hoover, and his commercial genius ushered in the Great Depression!

Trump’s best hope for economic success is probably deficit spending in the form of vastly overdue infrastructure improvements.  Obama has been trying to promote such improvements throughout his tenure as President with little success because of the gridlock in congress and the fear of the growing national debt.  But now that it is a conservative idea, it may get some traction . . . .

The sad truth is that middle class manufacturing jobs are unlikely ever to return in great numbers.  The automation and globalization genies are out of the bottle and no amount of demagoguery will put them back.  We face a brave new post-industrial world in the labor market, and we will probably have to go through a lot more pain before we evolve into a sensible new order that will not leave millions out in the cold.

So good luck Trump!  I really do wish you well.  Not because I have even the slightest admiration for you as a person.  I believe the way you ascended to the Presidency is the most pathetic spectacle I have witnessed in U.S. political life.  I wish you well because I want our nation to survive and, ultimately, to thrive.  It will most likely have to do that in spite of your leadership and policies rather than because of them.  But if it does I will be happy, even if it means that your petty but gargantuan ego can lay claim to having saved the republic.