From the Facebook Page: Spirituality Lab, November 6, 2020
Day 6—Where Do We Go From Here?
This has been a momentous week in a momentous year, and like all of you, I am exhausted, spent, played out, numb, you name it. Perhaps the last thing you want to do is read more about politics. Perhaps you are feeling as dis-spiritualized politically as can be.
That is okay—we are all allowed to take a breather and rejuvenate our spirits. In fact, it is a requirement if we are to remain as effective political actors at any level of our lives. Fifty-four years ago, Martin Luther King, Jr took such a hiatus after over a decade of intense political struggle, retiring to gather his energy and thoughts in a Jamaican cottage with no telephone or television connections to the United States. Selma, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 were all behind him—an incredible legacy of rapid social change to American society that had not been seen since the American Revolution.
The success of the Civil Rights Movement for basic Black rights was like a boulder dropped into a previously still pond, and the emanating shock waves were already generating other demands for expanded civil rights. Radical movements were taking root in both the Black community and student organizing. Right wing backlash was gathering organized momentum with the Goldwater campaign of 1964 and the organizations it had spawned.
Alone, in Jamaica, King wrote what would sadly become his final published work that he hoped would set the agenda for the next phase of the Civil Rights Movement—Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos or Community? On the one hand he wanted to resist the voices calling for even faster radical change for Black rights, driven by violent resistance. On the other, he saw clearly that the real problems of America were based in a severely unequal distribution of, and access to, wealth and resources.
King understood that Black American impoverishment was a more extreme example of the far greater problem of inequality that plagued Americans of all races. And the political tactician in him knew that true structural change would only come about if he could convince Americans of all races to see this as their common problem and work together to solve it. If we remained riven by race, then the struggle would focus on race and not on inequality.
We will never know if King would have been successful in this goal. What we do know is that the right has been able to stoke the racial divide as one of its major tools for pulling the nation to the far right. We know that liberal politicians have sometimes demagogued using race as their platform in order to gain their own share of power. And we know that inequality in America has continued to grow more sharply defined, even as the nation as whole has seen an incredible increase in wealth and living standards for many Americans—it is just that the top of the pyramid has seen far more wealth accumulation while the rest of the nation has less wealth and security than they could have.
The success of the Civil Rights Movement for basic Black rights was like a boulder dropped into a previously still pond, and the emanating shock waves were already generating other demands for expanded civil rights. Radical movements were taking root in both the Black community and student organizing. Right wing backlash was gathering organized momentum with the Goldwater campaign of 1964 and the organizations it had spawned.
Alone, in Jamaica, King wrote what would sadly become his final published work that he hoped would set the agenda for the next phase of the Civil Rights Movement—Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos or Community? On the one hand he wanted to resist the voices calling for even faster radical change for Black rights, driven by violent resistance. On the other, he saw clearly that the real problems of America were based in a severely unequal distribution of, and access to, wealth and resources.
King understood that Black American impoverishment was a more extreme example of the far greater problem of inequality that plagued Americans of all races. And the political tactician in him knew that true structural change would only come about if he could convince Americans of all races to see this as their common problem and work together to solve it. If we remained riven by race, then the struggle would focus on race and not on inequality.
We will never know if King would have been successful in this goal. What we do know is that the right has been able to stoke the racial divide as one of its major tools for pulling the nation to the far right. We know that liberal politicians have sometimes demagogued using race as their platform in order to gain their own share of power. And we know that inequality in America has continued to grow more sharply defined, even as the nation as whole has seen an incredible increase in wealth and living standards for many Americans—it is just that the top of the pyramid has seen far more wealth accumulation while the rest of the nation has less wealth and security than they could have.
Joe Biden needed to run against Donald Trump more than against the GOP policies that Trump embodies. If Biden wins, it will be a very narrow victory that comes in part from people who voted against the Trump personality and, perhaps, for Biden’s more calm, responsible demeanor. They were not voting for the Democratic platform in general. The Blue Wave that many liberals hoped for crashed into the reality that Democrats and liberals have still not made their case in a way that will sway close to 50% of the voting population—at least not yet.
I think that one way forward for Biden and liberals is to look to where King was heading. We need to make the case that a more just distribution of wealth is not only morally required, but it is also smart economic policy that will benefit all Americans in the long run. A healthy and wealthy middle class and working class spends a lot of its wealth each year, driving the economy forward for everyone (especially those at the top).
Focusing on taxing the “One Percent” is a nice sound bite, but the reality is that our economic inequality comes from far more than just the three to four million Americans who control the vast majority of wealth in our society. It has as much to do with access to power and a broader culture as it does with simple raw net worth.
I think that one way forward for Biden and liberals is to look to where King was heading. We need to make the case that a more just distribution of wealth is not only morally required, but it is also smart economic policy that will benefit all Americans in the long run. A healthy and wealthy middle class and working class spends a lot of its wealth each year, driving the economy forward for everyone (especially those at the top).
Focusing on taxing the “One Percent” is a nice sound bite, but the reality is that our economic inequality comes from far more than just the three to four million Americans who control the vast majority of wealth in our society. It has as much to do with access to power and a broader culture as it does with simple raw net worth.
It is too easy to simply target the One Percent, and it can leave folks who are not as liberal feeling cold and disconnected to the message. There is also a sense of “othering” the wealthiest, as if they are the only source of our problems, and if we can just tax their marginal income at 75% then all our other problems will be much easier to solve. We should not devolve to that level of othering—it never turns out well for a society, and in any event it is not the only answer to solving issues of inequality. The message needs to be that we all share the burden so that we all benefit.
If we, as a nation, are to work for more true equality and access to resources, we are all going to have to take some risks and make some sacrifices. It may well mean you or I pay higher taxes; there will certainly be those who get social benefits without doing their share of the work (the great fear of conservatives); there will still be super wealthy people and corporations that get social benefits without paying their fair share of the burden (the great fear of liberals). But if we all work towards a vision of more equality—of wealth, of resources, of access—with a spirit of getting better one day at a time, we will make this a much better nation and we will have a more self-sustaining economy that benefits us all. Moderation and sharing the burden need to be the message.
If we, as a nation, are to work for more true equality and access to resources, we are all going to have to take some risks and make some sacrifices. It may well mean you or I pay higher taxes; there will certainly be those who get social benefits without doing their share of the work (the great fear of conservatives); there will still be super wealthy people and corporations that get social benefits without paying their fair share of the burden (the great fear of liberals). But if we all work towards a vision of more equality—of wealth, of resources, of access—with a spirit of getting better one day at a time, we will make this a much better nation and we will have a more self-sustaining economy that benefits us all. Moderation and sharing the burden need to be the message.
This is where I want to leave my week of moderating this Lab on the Spirituality of Political Practice.
I ask that we all resist the temptation to reach for easy answers and sound bite politics. Do the very hard work of listening with an open mind and open heart to the fears, needs, wants, and world views of people you disagree with politically. Find areas of overlap with your own fears, hopes, and views and work to support policies—and politicians—who seek to find compromises that many can accept as legitimate. Advocate moderation because that is the way forward. Read and educate yourself on issues and do not succumb to click-bait politics either--especially where it conforms to your own biases. Be skeptical and question things and look for solid answers.
Get involved in local politics and local organizations if you can. Rub shoulders with your neighbors, talk to your local politicians, and understand the views of different people in your own community. This is actually a form of spiritual practice that will make you, and our nation, more serene and fruitful.
No comments:
Post a Comment