Today
I’m going to lecture you on communities and this is why you are going to give a
shit.
I’m
just kidding. I’m not going to lecture you. But you will end up giving a shit
by the end though.
In
the words of John Donne, “No man is an island entire of itself.” It is a great
paradox to believe that we are the center of our own universes, but rely wholly
on the “kindness of others,” as Tennessee Williams would put it. To better
understand ourselves and how to better ourselves, we must first recognize our
role in the community and how we can better our communities for ourselves.
Ourselves, not our self.
So
this is where we must start.
But
before we get into the weeds of how we will cut through the dense thicket of
thought on community development, I need to tell you a story.
You
are a member of Community B. In this community, there is a highly regimented
structure, with sleekness and efficiency in every department and walk of life.
There is incredibly strong leadership, a military capable of suppressing
opposing thought, and a sense of unity amongst the people. A common flag unites
all the people against invaders and enemies and a profound sense of national
pride flows through the very veins of the contributors to society. However,
there is a catch. Your country is committing the worst atrocity the world has
ever seen.
The
grotesque murder of 6 million Jews…
Though
yes, there is a tremendous amount of order and effectiveness in this community,
the severe, complete, and utterly deplorable lack of any sense of moral
compassing present within 1940’s Nazi Germany completely shatters the entire
case for it being deemed a “healthy community.”
It
goes deeper than just efficiency and solidarity in thought.
Here it is: A community,
for it to be healthy, must possess the fragile crystalline spine of morality
bereft of inclusions, while also boned with the marrow of fluid efficiency,
structure and organization. Once these are obtained and maintained, the rest of
the body of community can be built.
Every
so often in the happenings of human events, there come pressing forces that
weigh on the body of community. Sometimes, these forces are enough to crack and
potentially shatter the glass spine of morality in the community.
I
am going to tell you another story.
You
wake up. You do your morning exercises, all the while being constantly
surveilled through the television. You go to work, your superiors are always
watching your every move. Later on, you go into a large auditorium where a propaganda
video is played, all the while being surrounded by hundreds of peers who all
think alike. Down with the enemy! Hail to Big Brother! You go on with your day
and can’t help but notice that many people who have not conformed to the
accepted practices or ways of thought tend to disappear. You see some of these
men brutally beaten on the streets without remorse, only to ultimately never be
seen again. You live according to a strict schedule and requirements by the
state with little freedom of thought. In fact, you are required to adhere to a
strict policy of doublethink. This entails self-correcting any thoughts that
may enter your mind contrary to the goals and success of the state.
This
is the reality that George Orwell painted in his game-changing novel, 1984.
Not
exactly a feel good book. In fact, it was originally written to scare the
citizens of Great Britain into reversing the course that their country was
heading. This is a dystopian novel.
This is meant to be the quintessential example of too much government
intervention. Too much government censorship of information. Too much government
control. Novels like 1984, Handmaid’s Tale, Brave New World,
Fahrenheit 451, and The Giver all
paint pictures of what it means for a community to be unhealthy.
Yes,
there is structure. No, there is no freedom.
If
you were to disobey the government, you would be reconditioned into changing
your entire belief system entirely. Here lies an important point.
How
well the morality of the citizens align with the functionings of the state is a
litmus test for how well that crystalline spine is holding up.
How
well the morality of the “good man” matches with the requirement the state has
for “excellent citizens,” writes Aristotle, is indicative of how well that
society is doing (http://files.libertyfund.org/files/819/0033-02_Bk_SM.pdf).
Obviously
you, as a moral person in 1984, have
a morality that is in clash with that of the state. You think that it is wrong
for people to be beaten senselessly for trivial offenses. Instead, if you lived
in a state that incentivized charity giving, community service, political
engagement, and free thought, that would be indicative of a healthy community.
Orwell
and Aristotle weren’t the only ones to see these issues though.
Picture
yourself in a nation the size of Rhode Island. You are apart of the radical
left, liberal, socialist wing of thought. In the North there are the fascists.
In the East are the radical, extremist conservatives. And in the south are the
anarchists. You are heavily influenced by the political propaganda the leaders
of your party put out. You begin to see some of your childhood friends who have
gone to other areas of your nation as “others” or even “demons.” A war soon
breaks out amongst all 4 factions.
Alexander
Hamilton wrote about this a few hundred years ago in Federalist No. 10 (https://liberalarts.utexas.edu/coretexts/_files/resources/texts/c/1787%20Federalist%20No%2010.pdf).
Basically
what Hamilton was saying was that the more groups of thought there are, the
more likely shit will hit the ceiling.
Diversity
of thought is good. In fact, it is great.
But if a society allows it to concentrate itself into the beast of faction,
these can quickly devolve into agents of antagonism towards others, agents that
obtain freedom from depriving others of theirs.
This
is unhealthy. Factions wield the knife of stratification and hierarchy. They
cut the divisions of society and leave some at the bottom to fend for
themselves (1st and 2nd Estates in 18th
Century France). If you disagree with this, I’m sorry. I would agree with you
but then we’d both be wrong and we wouldn’t want that now would we?
Factions
are bad. Factions lead to subaltern groups.
That
leads us to our next point.
“I have a dream that one day this nation
will rise up, live out the true meaning of its creed, I hold these truths to be
self-evident, that all men are created equal.” (https://www.archives.gov/files/press/exhibits/dream-speech.pdf)
We all know where that speech came
from, not because it’s a super famous speech, but simply because I included the
hyperlink above. Yes, that was meant to be a joke, but the point is no laughing
matter. The black community fought for hundreds of years to gain equality in
the United States. It’s not just them either. Native Americans fought.
Afrikaans in South Africa fought. Women fought. Chinese oppressed under Mao
Zedong Fought. Ugandans under Idi Amin fought. Jews under Hitler fought. I
could go on and on but the point is clear.
There will never be a truly healthy
community for anyone if there is a presence of subaltern groups.
The
oppressors may have structure, but their morality is lacking. The oppressed may
be living morally, but there is not coherent structure in their lives.
You
need both to have a healthy community. Subaltern groups deny this possibility.
Often
times subaltern groups may lead to feelings of guilt in the oppressors. Imagine
an instance in which your benefit depended wholly upon the suffering of
another. Would you choose to live in that community or would the feelings of
guilt be too much for you to bear?
Lack
of guilt in a community can be directly associated with the degree in which that
community is violating moral codes.
Sure,
early 1940’s Germany was kicking ass. However, they were doing so at the
expense of millions of Jews. These feelings of guilt still carry over to today.
My sister took a trip to Germany and she said to this day that Germans feel
horrible for what they did just a mere 70-80 years ago. Swastikas are nowhere
to be found and whenever the concept of the Holocaust came up in conversation
with the people there, their eyes immediately turn to the floor.
In
the 1940’s, they had no guilt. They also were violating almost every moral code
in the book.
In
the 21st century, Germany is plagued with guilt for what they did.
Germany has one of the highest standards of living, GDP Per Capita rates, and
lowest income disparities in the entire world. I would call this a healthy
community.
Guilt
keeps people accountable. The people of Germany work hard, but not only in the
economic sense. They work hard to make sure the oppressed have a voice and what
is more, that they listen to this voice. This allows them to have structure in
their community while also abiding by moral codes in the process.
All
this is relevant to the prosperity of the society. What about its initial
existence?
The
very basis of a community is founded on the physical. That means we can’t have
a good community without the community as a start.
Imagine
living in a society underwater without any kind of breathing apparatuses.
Imagine living in a society with no water and no food and pollution everywhere.
For me, it is much easier to picture dying
there as opposed to living.
Stephanie
Kaza believes in a Buddhist approach to living in harmony with the surrounding
environment. She depicts the “Jewel Net of Indra” in which thousands of jewels
are constantly reflecting the rays from the others.
We
are all interconnected and it is a shame to think otherwise.
In
Africa, the concept of Ubuntu rings a similar bell. I will help my fellow
citizens because they are me and helping them helps me. It is a highly collective
approach to living. It also ensures that we are not taking advantage of our
environment or acting uncourteously.
All
this is to say one thing. A healthy community depends on two things: How well
it meets standards of morality and how well it functions structurally. Finding
this balance is the challenge that all states have to face.