Friday, July 17, 2009

The casualties of partisan politics



The casualties of partisan politics

The problem with our polarized political culture is not that people disagree. It's that truth disappears. Partisans, using words designed to elicit predictable responses, tap into and solidify divisions between groups so that each group stays together, bound by disdain for people who don't agree.

Well-reasoned exchanges of ideas are scarce because they don't suit this strategy. They allow for the possibility that people will find common ground and fraternize with the enemy. The result of this distortion of issues for partisan purposes is that we become accustomed to hearing and repeating things that aren't true, that don't make sense or that don't even agree with what we really believe.

One phrase used by partisan pitchmen is identity politics. The term was invented to describe political thinking and activity that focuses on the concerns of a particular group, often a group whose members share a history of suffering injustices connected to their identity as part of the group. Today, people speak derogatively of identity politics, implying that to advocate for the interests of one group you must negate the rights of others.

Not surprisingly, people use the phrase in reference to opponents, not themselves. This usage is revealing. Rather than acknowledge what we know to be true — that life is a juggling act in which we continually weigh our own interests against the interests of others — we pretend that only others think of themselves. In real world choices between selflessness and selfishness, we each fall somewhere on the spectrum between Mother Theresa and a psychopath. But in politics, we act as though there is no middle. We toss around the words "freedom" and "justice" as though it were a snap to do whatever you please and be fair to others at the same time. In reality, interests collide and injustices abound.

When opponents of the appointment of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court took one sentence from a speech that she had delivered and announced to the world that she is a racist, they tapped into white fears of preferential treatment for minority groups. Exploiting existing resentments, they did nothing to open a helpful discussion of the emotionally charged undercurrents surrounding identity politics.

Sotomayor's comment was taken from a speech in which she addressed the challenge all judges face, aspiring to be impartial, but inevitably affected to some degree by their experiences. Her nomination could prompt a reasonable national conversation about such questions. Congress will certainly try to determine her capacity for fairness.

No issue is more central to our lives than how fairly we act toward one another. One of the stated goals of our Constitution is to establish justice, and all major religions have variations of the golden rule. But making justice a reality can be complicated. When one group has suffered injustice and negative characterization, it is not a simple matter to repair the damage done. Those who have been oppressed may be burdened with anger. People who have been degraded may assert feelings of pride that others find threatening or unappealing. Members of historically favored groups may agree with the principle of equality but balk at the idea of giving anything up to make things right.

Annoyed or uncomfortable, people don't talk about these things. Some white people even believe racial bias is no longer a problem. Its easy to be blind to privileges we enjoy and barriers that don't exist because we're white. Pride in our own accomplishments might be threatened by knowing we've received unfair advantages. We judge others or we ignore them, but we don't broach the awkward conversations that could reveal the real truth. If we had the courage to talk to each other, we might learn that an African-American man, having achieved success and public recognition, can still be stopped by the police while walking along the bike path, his dark skin the only cause for suspicion. We would not assert that equal opportunity already exists if we were aware of how much more effort people have to give if they are perceived as different from the norm. Judging others unfairly is not just a missed opportunity for understanding. Everyday insults create an atmosphere that grants permission to extremists to commit hate crimes.

Our refusal to grapple with bias perpetuates contradictions. We take pride in our nations ethnic diversity, but ask each other to be blind to race and color. We can't seem to move beyond equating difference with inferiority, so we think the only way to avoid discrimination is to deny that differences exist. But pride in ones own heritage does not preclude respect for others.

Establishing the justice envisioned in our Constitution requires us to see beyond our own interests, to recognize unconscious biases, to seek fair balances and at times to relinquish privileges. It requires us to address problems honestly and to listen to views that differ from our own. Rights are not exclusive to any one group. Respect must extend to all.

These principles are not new, but they are unpopular with those who view freedom narrowly, as an individual experience never to be restrained. During periods when this perspective is in vogue, proponents make a virtue of selfishness, value success above cooperation, and condemn efforts aimed at the common good. Questions of justice, a nuisance to the self-absorbed, fall out of favor.

I believe we are emerging from such a time, as people from across the political spectrum ask policy makers to make reasonable, not ideological, choices. Plenty of ill will remains, but can appear foolish in contrast with the spirit of working together for good. Recently, I saw an anti-Obama bumper sticker that read q"Don't drink the Kool-Aid." The unintentional irony of the message was remarkable. Detractors ridicule enthusiasm for the new president as an irrational phenomenon. I believe the opposite as true. What stirs so many is the beautiful sound of the voice of reason.

Gail Bangert is a Harwich resident.



Copyright © Cape Cod Media Group, a division of Ottaway Newspapers, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090715/OPINION/907150327/-1/OPINION0310

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Can You Do Me A Favor?


Can You Do Me A Favor?

by Gail Bangert


http://capecodtimebank.blogspot.com

http://capecodtimebank.org


How Time banking logocan transform our Community

The Cape Cod Time Bank has been launched, and it’s getting people’s attention. The idea is simple: members give an hour of service to someone else and are entitled to receive an hour of service from another member in return. If you’re new to the concept, you might be wondering, “What’s the big deal? Countless organizations already enlist volunteers or even pay people to do the right thing.”

The difference between time banking and many other ways of helping people is subtle, but profound. Time banking works because everyone involved is valued. Consider for a moment the way we usually think about giving. “It’s better to give than to receive,” our simple mantra for teaching compassion, inadvertently sums up how demeaning it can be to need help. Whether the receiver is a senior citizen asking for help with home repairs or a poor person in need of free professional services, when only one person has the opportunity to give, the other feels useless or less valued. People want to give back.

This is the insight that Edgar Cahn, creator of time banking, gained lying in a coronary care unit. In his book, No More Throw-Away People, he explains that before the heart attack that landed him in the hospital in 1980, he had proudly spent his life helping others by fighting for justice.

Cahn worked with Robert Kennedy at the Justice Department and Sargent Shriver in the War on Poverty. He challenged the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the hunger and injustice faced by Native Americans. With his wife, he created the Antioch School of Law with a unique teaching law firm that represented thousands of poor people. Cahn realized in his hospital bed that being a person who could do things that other people needed was central to his self-worth, and he didn’t like feeling useless.

Cahn’s other key insight was about money. Perhaps you’re content in the knowledge that you have the means to buy the services that you need, that the economic market values your contribution, and that you can value others by paying them in turn.

The catch is that in the economic realm, not only commodities but also human abilities are valued based on their scarcity. Scarce items have a high value. Abundant items have a low value. When judged against this standard, the most common human capacities, like caring for each other, are devalued.

In the economic marketplace, values are assigned in a hierarchy, and everyone is well aware of how high or low they fall on the ladder. In a time bank, an hour of service given by one person is equal to an hour of service given by any other person. The hierarchy is gone.

For me, the truly fascinating element of time banking is this reshuffling of the social deck. We trudge or glide through our days, the heaviness of our steps determined to some degree by our status and the amount of money in our pockets. Our assigned rankings inevitably color our interactions, in spite of egalitarian myths.

That a time bank member, perhaps previously unknown to another, can step into that other person’s life and be judged by a single act of kindness (and maybe how the recipient’s garden looks without weeds) seems to me an amazing gift of fresh perspective.

When my husband, John Bangert, first shared the time banking concept with me, and announced his determination to start a time bank on Cape Cod, I found the idea immediately appealing. This is a remarkable statement for me to make after living with a community organizer for thirty four years.

John and I share deeply held values, but he’s the one with the zeal for outreach, always out front with a new idea. I listen, steer, edit, sort, and carry boxes. I have been known to try to stifle his irrepressible urge to act, if only to dig out the office from the last adventure. Our home is strewn with flyers, contact lists, and life-sized candidate cutouts, and there is always a project afoot.

I work 75 hours a week at my paid job and come home to a buzzing community headquarters. I’m not even sure how I’ll find hours to give. And yet I’m excited and energized by this simple idea. I should be balking at the prospect of more to do, but time banking sounds more rewarding than burdensome.

An amazing thing happens when people fill out the membership form. As they begin to list services they want to offer, there’s often a wonderful moment when they realize how capable they really are and how much they have to contribute.

Looking outward, members have the chance to see others with new eyes. A quiet woman you’ve seen around town turns out to be a retired physical therapist and personal trainer. The IT person that you plague with computer questions at work is also a banjo teacher. There are actually people who love to weed!

Photo-Chris Gray, John Bangert, & Edgar Cahn in Madison Wisconsin


The financial cost of living on Cape Cod is high, and it requires many of us to work more hours than we wish, leaving too little time to focus on our families and friends. But the price we pay is not just time. The real cost, says Edgar Cahn in his book No More Throw Away People, “is the hold that money has on our sense of what is possible, the prison it builds for our imagination.”

The vision of Cape Cod Time Bank is to help people break free of this yoke and weave a new kind of community. The “free market” may say that you can’t afford a gardener. Time banking says you can. The recession threatens to close the door to home ownership, higher education, and other pieces of the American dream to a growing segment of our population. Maybe the America dream just needs a new definition.

Gail Bangert is a community activist and member of the Cape Cod Time Bank. She lives with her husband in Harwich.