It’s been six weeks since my last post - not because of a lack of ideas, but because there’s so much going on in the world and in my country, and while I still want to speak and to go on-the-record about my concerns, I haven’t had the words to say what I needed to say. But this week I found clarity.
On Wednesday I chaperoned a group of fifth graders on an overnight campout at Wahsega. I had a rowdy group, but we had a great time, and were one of the first to bed (and one of the first ones packed out in the morning). As I left I could see in the kids’ eyes that I’d had a positive impact on them.
While I was there, I read this article arguing that our cultural shamelessness has led us to become “a society of grift, where a willingness to take advantage of others is a cheat code, or a campaign platform”. The article ends with "I don't know how we combat this"…and I thought, oh, I think maybe I know.
Ten or fifteen years ago I started to see the term "needs to happen" in online discourse. It was a useful rhetorical shortcut - instead of dwelling on the tactical steps ahead, it refocused on the outcome they wanted to see.
But there's hazard: if I tell you something "needs to happen", the best I can hope for is that you agree with me, and that maybe that translates into some future action. But if you don't agree completely - then what? How do we find a middle ground? How do we work together?
Saying "needs to happen" adds a false universality to an argument. It's passive-aggressive, and reinforces other passive-aggressive behaviors that communicate ideology without personal risk. Worst of all, it leaves us all vulnerable to action by opponents who are willing to be non-passively aggressive. Yard signs are ineffective against leaders who ignore the rule of law. Ideology without action is dead.
When you focus on specific actions grounded in your beliefs, you can build coalitions with people who you disagree with ideologically, and this collaboration makes it easier to prioritize actions that are effective and impactful and not just those that are attention-getting. The USA was built off people imperfectly uniting around a handful of core operational activities they could agree on1.
My country is in a very fragile place right now. The president has issued executive orders that are unconstitutional and illegal. Members of his administration are acting outside the law and beyond their authority. Checks and balances aren’t functioning.
In light of this, two kinds of action “need to happen”:
1. Refuse corruption. Don't do things that are illegal or a “violation of the rules” just because someone lets you, and be cautious in accepting favors that are unfairly given. This escalates the breakdown of the rule of law, inhibits cooperation, and gives others leverage over you that can anchor you to a bad situation! (I’ve been thinking about this a lot as I watch Severance Season 2.)
2. Be strong and courageous and do the work. Steadfastly act according to your conscience. Don’t just hide in the shadow of what is legal and uncomplicated – claim what you’re entitled to, especially in situations where it will provoke a response. I'm thinking about the Freedom Riders of the 1960s who risked their lives by exercising their legal right to ride on racially integrated bus transportation, knowing full well that they would likely end up in jail, beaten, and possibly murdered. I'm thinking of the sanctuary churches of the 1980s who risked the future of their congregations by seeking out refugees who were being denied their legal right to asylum. But don't just wait for an opportunity to do this at a national level; it's impactful even just to change your approach from "this needs to stop" to "hey you, stop doing that".
I was once visiting the Monterrey Bay National Marine Sanctuary when I saw someone illegally flying a drone over an area where the sea lions had gathered2. I was angry about it…but didn't do anything. I didn’t really know how. But my father-in-law modeled the behavior I now seek to show: he confronted the operator, and when they refused to stop, he left to find a park ranger. This last action was the step that pushed the operator to stop and leave.
Sometimes a single small action turns into a larger campaign: George Dale put everything on the line (and sacrificed most of it) to drive the KKK from Muncie, Indiana and eventually succeeded. Profiles in Courage is full of good examples of a single person standing steadfastly for what is right. As George Chidi wrote when John Lewis died:
It’s easy enough to say that we need John Lewis more than ever. It’s harder, I think, to say that we must be John Lewis, and that this is achievable for you or I. That John Lewis’s courage is not an excuse for lacking our own.
If someone is cheating at a game you can stop playing, or you can appeal to an authority. But you can also know the rules yourself and insist that they follow them. Leadership can begin with any individual who takes the opportunity to lead, and this is a time when we must expect and provide and defend ethical leadership.
Going back to the article I quoted at the start - how do you fight shamelessness? By creating shame where it’s needed! You don’t need to “make a case”. You don’t need to be angry or loud. You just need be willing to stand up and say “You can’t do that here, it’s not appropriate”. Resist the urge to argue. You don’t need to defend or explain the law - you just need to call on people to follow it. Do the right thing, and confront others around you when they don’t.
Don’t just do good where it comes easily. Proactively take a stand that incurs a risk and comes at a cost. Lay claim publicly to what you value. Demonstrate "uncivil obedience".
And also by ignoring some VERY IMPORTANT IDEAS that have led to one civil war so far.
Do you think this is a government overreach over a small transgression? Fight to change the law! Or, do what you think you should do, accept the consequences, and fight it in court. But don’t just break the law only at times you think you won’t get caught!