Check Up from the Neck Up

Curious how white supremacists could arrive at such an extreme position?

I've often wondered why the racial tensions I see in the west are perhaps less severe and expressed differently in other cultures. 

We have an odd history of stumbling along a perhaps different path. Among the colonists who landed in the west were those who weren't looking for a place to live, they were looking to be an extension of the empire, conquering and getting wealthy. When the indigenous folks declined to become their labor force, the elites discovered that they hadn't a clue how to survive, and most of the colonists died.  They didn't have the skills.  Only about 50 lived through the winter of 1609-10 from the original hundreds. 

British merchants began supplying labor from Europe and Africa; teenagers indentured and/or kidnapped and sold for labor as servants (slaves). After a couple of decades, the 'servants' outnumbered the elites by as much as 100 to 1.  It was volatile, and the 'servants' began to organize, to arm, and to revolt. Virginia history documents ten organized rebellions by mixed groups (African, European, other), ending with Bacon's Rebellion in 1676.  The rebels burned the capitol city of Jamestown to the ground, and chased the governor out of town.  They demanded pay and land for their labor.  The elites called in the army and crushed the rebellion; it was the last such major uprising.

Perhaps as an effort to divide and conquer, the laws that followed drew a line between black and white. Black servants were to be slaves for life as were any children born to them, and they were not allowed to marry. Whites were to perhaps be eventually freed from indenture, although many never were. Black free persons were severely constrained. More laws (the slave codes) followed, widening the gap between black and white and laying the legal foundation for today's racism, both subtle and extreme.

How it works:

There's perhaps a common thread in race-based conflict and in a class-conscious culture.[a]  It's our focus on our differences, the deliberate formalization of differences rather than common humanity and mutual assimilation, something perhaps more easily observed elsewhere in the world.[b] 

The media makes it difficult with inflammatory retelling of the alt-right meeting in D.C., as though those 200 men were somehow newsworthy.  You have to wonder if there isn't a more thoughtful response we might make as individuals and as a nation.  The media is a disappointment.[c]  It's a good opportunity for the church.  The key is not our differences, of course.

 [a] The capitalist system ultimately commodifies all workers – one’s own person becomes a commodity that one must sell in the labor market while the profits of one’s work are taken by someone else.  To keep this capitalist system in place… the logic of slavery applies a racial hierarchy to this system.  This racial hierarchy tells people that as long as you are not black, you have the opportunity to escape the commodification of capitalism.  This helps people who are not black to accept their lot in life, because they can feel that at least they are not at the very bottom of the racial hierarchy – at least they are not property; at least they are not slaveable. -Andrea Smith

 [b] Netherlands, Belgium, Finland, Sweden, Norway, and Denmark are among the least racist countries in the world with large percentages of foreign origin, little if any discrimination, and effective community, assimilation.

[c]The millions of Muslims who oppose ISIS aren't mentioned in the news, of course, nor is the fact that the primary ISIS target is other Muslims.  (In cases where the religious affiliation of terrorism casualties could be determined, Muslims suffered between 82 and 97% of terrorism-related fatalities over the past five years.)

Policy vs. Politics

Why Nations Succeed or Fail.  It has been on our minds lately as economic and political turmoil have stirred America and the world.  While today might be making us nervous, the debate over national viability spans the years.

There are a lot of half-answers -- they've been offered and discarded.  Things like:

• It's the geography! - some places are good and others not so good.  True, but nations rise and fall in every region.  Did you know that North America was the 'leftovers' for colonization; all the wealth was farther south and had been claimed.
• It's the demographics! - indigenous, immigrant, race, origin ... countries with virtually identical demographics vary widely in degrees of success.
• It's the culture! - it makes a difference but not definitively.  South and North Korea are perhaps the most successful and most disastrous expressions of a single culture, geography, and demographic.

Extractive vs. inclusive -- when people are the 
resource, using them up and leaving them behind 
while the wealthy continue to benefit, that's 
extractive rather than inclusive.  The result 

is destructive to most for the

benefit of the few.

• It's politics! - maybe, but it's more the specific leadership and the policies chosen to maintain power, to benefit the influential, to please the power players that make a difference.

• Economics? - well, the math part is easy, but it's the policies that make the difference.  Extractive versus inclusive policies and institutions are the difference between Nogales, Mexico and Nogales, Arizona.

So, governance (policies & players) makes the difference.  

A benevolent dictator can govern a healthy economy and culture; bizarre but true.  And, a democracy might produce a disaster of polarization and inequality; Hitler's Germany began as a democracy that was bent that way.

The common factors contributing to a nation's success or failure are perhaps most visible at the individual level.

I have opportunity, the community makes a place for me and my family, and there's help for those who need it.  Everyone needs a hand along the way, of course, and I'll be glad to help, too.  There's a fair return for my labor, for my contribution.    

<< Equality vs. Inequality >>    

At the opposite end of that spectrum, such quality of life concerns are addressed at a minimum level, perhaps just short of deadly.  In the western world, it's depersonalized as 'those welfare leeches', 'that 47% who never contribute', 'those government-dependents'.

Governance and policy determine the well-being of regular folks.

Government policies that attempt to address the needs of millions are rarely successful for all, and they often do harm to some.  If they're not reviewed and refined, they'll continue to be problematic. That part is understood and worth our aggressive effort to improve, but those are not the highest risk.

Government decisions that favor wealth and power are deadly. They commonly lead to the nation's decline and eventual failure. That's the history.  Increasing inequality such as we see today is just an indicator.

It's only among humans that we see the quest for 'more than I need or could ever use'.  Greed, avarice, gluttony, selfishness, pride, excess, all at the expense of others ... the subject matter is ancient, well understood, and ignored in extractive economics, today's common baseline for policy.

If serfdom were a gallon bucket, we'd be below the rim and sinking as economic inequality accelerates and the GAP widens.

There are easy solutions of course.  It's the players that make it hard.

(Ref: Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty -- Daron Acemoğlu and James A. Robinson)

Those who serve

There have been many who served us well, many who found the principles of the nation echoing in their heart and mind.  Life, liberty, equality, justice, all were profoundly embedded in the character and convictions of those who served. Many of them fought and died so that we and our children might live in such freedom.

There have been many who exploited us, many who lived without principle and whose goals were position and power at the expense of others.  Life, liberty, equality, and justice are all on the chopping block for abuse and misuse by such a self-appointed elite.

Those who serve well may not be honored as they deserve, but their legacy remains among us.  This nation is not defined by government or politicians or corporations, it is defined by the proper rights of the people.  If necessary, we'll clean up the mess yet again, perhaps after we quit squabbling like children.  That's how a free country works.

______________________________
Note: The election has been describe as regicide, the ending of rule by parties.  Long before the election, the party leadership had chosen their candidates and were preparing their plans for the post election years.  Clinton and Bush were the chosen ones.  The voters decimated both parties; both are at a loss to reign in their members, to corral them back to the party line.  Regardless of the outcome of Trump's presidency, the parties will have to rebuild or be left behind.  That's perhaps the most satisfying part of what we've seen.  😏

One Step Removed

Face to face and familiar; that's the norm for community.  In a community of just a few thousand residents, most days will include regular encounters with friends and acquaintances. Such a community has natural constraints for behavior, manners, family, and business practices.

Just one step removed, anonymity.  In a densely populated region, coming and going commonly occurs without familiar faces.  Those with whom you share the road are just shadow people of no consequence.  We needn't greet them politely or treat them graciously.  If fact, rude words are common, and aggressive maneuvers are frequent, things you'd never do to a friend or a family member.  Why might that be?

In one small west African country, everyone knows everyone and their parents and siblings and cousins.  There is no anonymity, and consequently, little misbehavior and no particular crime to worry about.  Children run free and everyone watches out for them.  Extended families are close, and they depend on each other.  Only a few have extracted themselves from the culture to pursue wealth and prestige instead of place and belonging.  Most are too intimately tied to one another to stray far.  It's an interesting dynamic; is it preferable?

Apart from poverty and frequently inadequate diet, citizens of this small country are better equipped for life than most in the developed world.  Children are confident, cross-generationally engaged, and knowledgeable about their culture and environment.  They learn essential skills by working alongside their parents and others.  Compared to inner-city children in the U.S., these African children are perhaps fortunate in many ways.

In inner-city Baltimore, most children in one student group had a family member or friend they knew who had died from street violence, most were regularly exposed to the drug culture, most had an unstable home life.  Those issues are minimal or nonexistent in this one African community.  Uncommon, perhaps, but instructive.

Despite my poor grasp of their language, they patiently
educated me in the ways of family, work, and respect.
It took a few years, and there is still so much more.
Every day, I'm thankful to these great folks.

I was a stranger working in their country, and they took me in.  They made a place for me among them and taught me much about the real world.  That reality, more than years of academic pursuit, has opened doors I didn't know were there.

It's easy in our busy lives to remain comfortably narrow in our circle of friends, but should we perhaps deliberately expand to include ... more of the real world?

_______________________________________
Social theory suggests, among other things, that healthy community includes interpersonal engagement, residential proximity, and open area for activities.  It suggests that complex engagement and interaction produces equality, opportunity, advancement, and benefit for most if not all.  
It suggests further that high density population areas tend to decline in all of those categories.  Why might that be?

Love problems

The first problem with love is the tenderness it provokes in us. It can bring an almost overwhelming vulnerability that's like living with a knife in your heart.

The second is the furious strength and crystal clarity required to love well and fully.

The warm affection we feel is just that; a feeling.
The pleasure we experience in their presence is just that; our pleasure.
The joy of spending time together is ours, too, as are the memories.
All that is good, but it isn't the centerpiece.

Egyptian woman kisses a policeman during the

revolution against Mubarak [Egypt, 2011]

What we do and the choices we make, those are at the center of genuine love.  When we choose in the best interest of another, whether it's instructing our child or feeding the hungry, whether it's standing up for the good of others or losing our place because we put someone else first, it's what we do and the choices we make that embody genuine love.

If you care just a little, you'll do a little.

If you love, you'll stay alongside.

Brazilian protester carrying an injured officer

to safety as violence escalates

 [Sao Paulo, Brazil, 2012]

Love is the root of character.  The one who loves truly will serve well and will do so even at personal cost.

Let's not pretend we love one another if we can't get past politics or race or culture.

Strong love is durable, it makes a place for others and has no need to put another down or to insult or do harm.  Strong love is a life-changer, a help-bringer, a world-changer.  It's the light that shines brightest on dark days. It's our greatest offering.

How many?

5

Mongol Conquests

Death Toll Estimate: 60 Million

4

World War 1

Death Toll Estimate: 65 Million

3

World War 2

Death Toll Estimate: 72 Million

2

European Colonization of the Americas

Death Toll Estimate: 100 Million

1

Child mortality by starvation or preventable disease
Death toll estimate: 300 Million+ since 1970

Death by war in the 20th century is estimated at 200+ million.  The death toll from preventable causes among children under age five and just since 1970 exceeds 300 million.  And that is just the children.  The death of each precious child was a great loss to their family.  Across populations, death and suffering from poverty, economic inequality, and disenfranchisement (all unnecessary and addressable) are beyond measure.  Or excuse.

While there are many difficult problems associated with civilization, it's worth remembering that deprivation from generation to generation is not chosen by the victims, it is imposed by governance and sustained by predatory trade and finance.

Seeing the problem perhaps reveals the solution as well.