The Declaration of Independence ends with the word honor -- how about that? The Declaration asks how to behave honorably in a time of national crisis, and it offers an answer that begins, in the first paragraph, with the idea of decency. Now that one of our two national parties has sold out to leadership and ways of operating that know nothing about human decency, I tried to slow down and think for a few paragraphs about what honorable, patriotic decency might be. A radio essay came of it. Audio here, full text below.#
A teacher once told me that “For emphasis and clarity, good writers often place the most important idea at the end of a sentence.” I remembered his comment recently when I was having morning coffee and reading — wait for it — reading the Declaration of Independence. I didn’t use to study our country’s founding documents over breakfast, but times of national crisis demand new routines. I was surprised to see that the Declaration ends with a sentence that itself ends with the word honor. How’s that for emphasis? Thomas Jefferson and his co-signers plainly wanted us to think about honor.#
Seeing honor being given this much emphasis, I looked back over our brief but potent Declaration and formulated a small theory. I think the Declaration of Independence tries to answer this question: “During a national crisis, what does it mean to behave with honor?” And the Declaration provides an answer to its own question, starting as early as the first paragraph.#
There the signers of the Declaration want us to think about decency. I’ll quote the exact phrase. The signers say that in a time of national crisis we must pay QUOTE “a decent respect for the opinions of mankind” END QUOTE. To behave with decency, therefore, is to speak respectfully to others and take care to engage with their questions and their opinions. No wonder American soldiers in the Revolutionary War were horrified when the enemy killed American soldiers they had captured. The idea of decency was alive in the young nation. And from time to time we hear of it again.#
In the 1950s, the honorable idea of decency made a remarkable appearance. As you may recall, a crass, innuendo-spouting, microphone-loving politician named Senator Joseph McCarthy used his access to TV cameras to cause fear and chaos in the country and to provoke a national crisis. Sadly, he’s a familiar type. A big part of McCarthy’s method was carrying out high-visibility character assassination in press conferences and government hearings. But finally someone called him on it. In a public hearing, with the news cameras rolling, after McCarthy attacked and tormented yet another person, a lawyer named Joseph Welch stopped him, saying, “Until this moment, Senator, I think I never really gauged your cruelty or your recklessness . . . . Let us not assassinate this lad further, senator. You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir?”#
So the idea of decency is tucked away in our founding documents, and from time to time somebody asserts the idea in public. If they didn’t, we’d probably lose track of it completely. But I don’t like just chanting words that have a patriotic history. In a time of national crisis, that’s weak sauce. We need better.#
We won’t solve our current national crisis by consuming more heaping servings of chaos and innuendo, and we won’t save the democracy while sipping our morning coffee either. We’ve got a fight on our hands, but I’m pretty sure we won’t have democracy without decency.#
“I’ve had enough of reading things / by neurotic, psychotic, pig-headed politicians. / All I want is the truth now. / Just give me some truth.”#
Then, as now, it's difficult to pierce the veil of political rhetoric for the sake of one's own clear thinking, yes, but all the more so for creating something meaningful with other kindred spirits on this fragile planet. Not impossible, though. There are patterns to work with going forward, methods, stepping stones set in place by others, cairns marking trails that previous walkers have maintained for the day when we would need to head out in this or that direction. There are message systems that still can be made to function. There are people who would like to be in touch.#
We need to carefully identify the mind-numbing, population-sedating "normalizing" techniques that blur the specific dangers the country now faces, writes @Anne_Arbor, not so we can nod our heads knowingly over our morning coffee but so that we can recognize them quickly and knock them down." #
For example, she praises Richard @Stengel's brief careful discussion of journalists and politicians who lament that "we are a divided country." Stengel writes:#
The journalistic trope of saying we are “deeply divided” is a normalizing frame and a moral dodge. Yes, we were “deeply divided” during the Civil War, but the two sides were not equal: one was in favor of enslaving human beings. One candidate already has tried to overturn an election and is giving every indication of doing it again. Overturning democracy is not a “side”. The First Amendment protects the press so the press can protect democracy.#
Thinking and analyzing carefully, as these two writers do even in the space of a couple of tweets, gets the ball rolling. That still leaves us at the breakfast table, pleased with ourselves about all the insights. Activists have a toolkit that makes much more than a daily caffeine hit possible after an insight.#
If people show up for your event, get their contact information on a sign-up sheet. Without gathering the email addresses of kindred spirits, you might as well not bother organizing an event. Promise to send out useful next steps via email, and then keep your promise. Events are just a step along the way.#
And politics is repetitive. Like shampoo: Lather, Rinse, Repeat.#
The Declaration of Independence ends with the word honor -- how about that? The Declaration asks how to behave honorably in a time of national crisis, and it offers an answer that begins, in the first paragraph, with the idea of decency. Now that one of our two national parties has sold out to leadership and ways of operating that know nothing about human decency, I tried to slow down and think for a few paragraphs about what honorable, patriotic decency might be. A radio essay came of it. Audio here, full text below.#
A teacher once told me that “For emphasis and clarity, good writers often place the most important idea at the end of a sentence.” I remembered his comment recently when I was having morning coffee and reading — wait for it — reading the Declaration of Independence. I didn’t use to study our country’s founding documents over breakfast, but times of national crisis demand new routines. I was surprised to see that the Declaration ends with a sentence that itself ends with the word honor. How’s that for emphasis? Thomas Jefferson and his co-signers plainly wanted us to think about honor.#
Seeing honor being given this much emphasis, I looked back over our brief but potent Declaration and formulated a small theory. I think the Declaration of Independence tries to answer this question: “During a national crisis, what does it mean to behave with honor?” And the Declaration provides an answer to its own question, starting as early as the first paragraph.#
There the signers of the Declaration want us to think about decency. I’ll quote the exact phrase. The signers say that in a time of national crisis we must pay QUOTE “a decent respect for the opinions of mankind” END QUOTE. To behave with decency, therefore, is to speak respectfully to others and take care to engage with their questions and their opinions. No wonder American soldiers in the Revolutionary War were horrified when the enemy killed American soldiers they had captured. The idea of decency was alive in the young nation. And from time to time we hear of it again.#
In the 1950s, the honorable idea of decency made a remarkable appearance. As you may recall, a crass, innuendo-spouting, microphone-loving politician named Senator Joseph McCarthy used his access to TV cameras to cause fear and chaos in the country and to provoke a national crisis. Sadly, he’s a familiar type. A big part of McCarthy’s method was carrying out high-visibility character assassination in press conferences and government hearings. But finally someone called him on it. In a public hearing, with the news cameras rolling, after McCarthy attacked and tormented yet another person, a lawyer named Joseph Welch stopped him, saying, “Until this moment, Senator, I think I never really gauged your cruelty or your recklessness . . . . Let us not assassinate this lad further, senator. You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir?”#
So the idea of decency is tucked away in our founding documents, and from time to time somebody asserts the idea in public. If they didn’t, we’d probably lose track of it completely. But I don’t like just chanting words that have a patriotic history. In a time of national crisis, that’s weak sauce. We need better.#
We won’t solve our current national crisis by consuming more heaping servings of chaos and innuendo, and we won’t save the democracy while sipping our morning coffee either. We’ve got a fight on our hands, but I’m pretty sure we won’t have democracy without decency.#
“I’ve had enough of reading things / by neurotic, psychotic, pig-headed politicians. / All I want is the truth now. / Just give me some truth.”#
Then, as now, it's difficult to pierce the veil of political rhetoric for the sake of one's own clear thinking, yes, but all the more so for creating something meaningful with other kindred spirits on this fragile planet. Not impossible, though. There are patterns to work with going forward, methods, stepping stones set in place by others, cairns marking trails that previous walkers have maintained for the day when we would need to head out in this or that direction. There are message systems that still can be made to function. There are people who would like to be in touch.#
We need to carefully identify the mind-numbing, population-sedating "normalizing" techniques that blur the specific dangers the country now faces, writes @Anne_Arbor, not so we can nod our heads knowingly over our morning coffee but so that we can recognize them quickly and knock them down." #
For example, she praises Richard @Stengel's brief careful discussion of journalists and politicians who lament that "we are a divided country." Stengel writes:#
The journalistic trope of saying we are “deeply divided” is a normalizing frame and a moral dodge. Yes, we were “deeply divided” during the Civil War, but the two sides were not equal: one was in favor of enslaving human beings. One candidate already has tried to overturn an election and is giving every indication of doing it again. Overturning democracy is not a “side”. The First Amendment protects the press so the press can protect democracy.#
Thinking and analyzing carefully, as these two writers do even in the space of a couple of tweets, gets the ball rolling. That still leaves us at the breakfast table, pleased with ourselves about all the insights. Activists have a toolkit that makes much more than a daily caffeine hit possible after an insight.#
If people show up for your event, get their contact information on a sign-up sheet. Without gathering the email addresses of kindred spirits, you might as well not bother organizing an event. Promise to send out useful next steps via email, and then keep your promise. Events are just a step along the way.#
And politics is repetitive. Like shampoo: Lather, Rinse, Repeat.#