Stop. Hey, What's That Sound
I have been regularly listening
to a podcast called Making Sense by Sam
Harris, a neuroscientist and famous published atheist and podcaster. He may be animated by contrarianism, but to a
fault, he wants to take a look at all sides of things it seems to me, to take a look at this thing as meditation teacher Rodney Smith likes to
say. After the protests in the aftermath
of George Floyd’s killing by the police officer, and the aftermaths of the
protests, and the other things going on in the cities in the name of Black
Lives Matter, Sam Harris posted an episode of the podcast wherein he reflected on what he thought was going on
and how the overall orientation of what we consider to be the BLM movement might lead to more suffering, particularly that such an orientation could contribute significantly to the possibility of a second Trump term. A few months later, Harris had Columbia
university professor John McWhorter on his podcast discussing racism, identity
politics, double standards for the black community, the war on drugs, police
violence and the “enduring riddle” of affirmative action, among other topics. McWhorter
has a book coming out that Harris says we should all read regarding these concerns and
how we might avoid disasters like a second Trump term.
I am quite challenged by
McWhorter and Harris. I feel a kinship
and “membership” level of connection with “the left”, but unlike some, I am never quite sure
what “we” want for sure when it comes to specific policies. I am often called out as a devil’s advocate when to me, it just seems like I am trying to find the truth or maybe just a
place where I can live with others (including Republicans) and not feel that
eventually we’ll have to kill or be killed.
A perhaps somewhat off topic but I think relevant example is my reaction
to the political polarization around the forest fires in the West this summer and fall,
which caused so much loss of property, some loss of life, and a situation of
prolonged smoke in the air that those of us in it felt that we had to choose
where we couldn’t breathe. Do you want
2.5 micron particles in your lungs at extremely hazardous levels, or do you
want Covid-19 spikes in your nose? In or out?
It really felt apocalyptic there for a while, especially when the
daytime sky turned orange. The news
media (I’m tuned into NPR and read the New York Times) talked about Climate
Change Fires while Trump and others talked about the Forestry Management
Fires. One or the other, chose your
side. To me this seemed ridiculous, on
both sides. Sure, when climate change fails to get mentioned, it reminds some
of us that there are those who feel this isn’t something worth thinking about,
or that it’s not as important for future generations as it is. Nevertheless, to say that other factors such
as forestry management and the Wilderness-Urban-Interface are not to be
mentioned or discussed, and that to mention them is tantamount to weakening support for action on climate change, is unhelpful.
Why not acknowledge both, and
discuss? It’s quite obvious that both
are important. I’m just going to resonate here with some Sam
Harris type arrogance and express my firm belief that I am right on this point. That is, that there are multiple sides to
most dilemmas, and that claiming some don’t or shouldn’t exist because you
prefer (for perhaps very good reasons) to focus on one or more to the exclusion
of any consideration of the others, or at least appear to be claiming such a
position, is counterproductive. And likely to be
dangerous, in that for example, such behavior might further polarize and contribute to
political outcomes that could be as bad as a second Trump term.
I decided to follow up on the
podcast, so I looked up McWhorter (and another black college professor, Glenn
Loury) and read a couple essays published by a group called “1776
Unites”:
https://1776unites.com/essays/the-1619-project-depicts-an-america-tainted-by-original-sin/
and
https://1776unites.com/essays/we-cannot-allow-1619-to-dumb-down-america-in-the-name-of-a-crusade/
I am a slow reader, and my temperament is
a bit on the self-critical side, which might cause some mental lethargy here
and there. I want to understand what’s going on, but it seems that in order to
understand all this, and to dissect out all the arguments and orientations,
will take more intellectual power than I have.
Do I read McWhorter’s and Loury’s books, or X Kendi’s and Wilkerson’s
books? Do I have to read them all, and
then read even more (you all know the list).
What do I do?
Until
recently I guess I was content to just be a left of center liberal democrat and
just do what I felt up to doing. You
know, don’t beat yourself up, contribute to changing the world by not refusing
to do the one thing you can do. Just be
a human being, be decent, don’t hurt people.
But now it feels as if signing on to everything that my friends on the
left come up with, what pretty much I come up with, might be misguided. This polarization
thing is getting pretty extreme. So if
all these black intellectuals are refuting the 1619 project and challenging the
underlying assumptions of the BLM leaders, why should I feel that their
perspectives are flawed? Maybe they are
all right-wing extremists who have been
duped and brainwashed by our capitalist leaders and our capitalist system, but
maybe they have a useful perspective. Are
they de facto dupes because they challenge the 1619 project, and therefore
there’s no need to try to understand what they are saying? Or does the fact that I ask these questions require me to look deeper to try and
understand? I have to believe that it’s
possible to discern what’s valuable without having to read everything or
consider everyone’s perspective, because if that were true, we’d all be
paralyzed, unable to act out of a perception that we don’t have the whole
truth.
Thanks for reading. I will keep reading, and thinking, and discussing when there's an opportunity.
And now, for a picture I love which I took while biking in Grand Teton National Park this past summer.
Hey Rob, great post capturing the mood and yearning for me, and perhaps many. I gotta get to Jenny Lake.
ReplyDeleteGood post Rob, lots to think about. I'm grappling with many of those same issues and, unfortunately, I'm in a state of paralysis right now. My "Trumper" family on the east side of the Cascades totally baffle me and I'm so shocked by the things they say and believe that I lack any response. I can definitely relate more easily to my left leaning friends, especially when we engage in a Trump bashing fest, but when it comes to plans of action, like around social justice issues, I feel uncomfortable with some of what my friends do and say. Yet, I am often uncomfortable expressing contrary thoughts because I am, after all, one of those privileged white males. I definitely plan to look up the people you mentioned in your post. The only one I've read previously is Sam Harris.
ReplyDeleteHey Rob! I was also frustrated by the conversation surrounding the fires, because I work in the realm of forest ecology and it's clearly not JUST climate change nor JUST poor management (although Smokey the Bear was the worst thing to ever happen to western forests). However, I also don't blame climate activists to for trying to use whatever is in the public consciousness to try to make a drive for constructive change. In addition, the "other side" was not making a good faith argument. When they say "forest management" what they're really saying is that they want to unfetter the chainsaws and allow more logging, when really the forest management that is needed is mostly uneconomical thinning + prescribed fire + letting natural fires burn. Of course, we also need a pro-density, affordable housing agenda that stops the sprawl of homes into the "wildland-urban interface". I know this wasn't the primary point of your post, but I just had to get on my pulpit for a second! Best fishes, --Tynan
ReplyDelete