[Dialogue] Fw: On Moral Politics

[ralexan934@sbcglobal.net]

This is an essay written by my son, Danny Alexander, that is appropriate for
the discussion we are now having. Danny is an "activist", a writer, and an
English teacher in Kansas City. I know he would appreciate any comments or
feedback you may have.
Roger Alexander


>
> On Moral Politics
>
> It's ironic that Tuesday's election hinged on moral values because "moral
> politics" surely sounds like an oxymoron to most Americans.  40% didn't
> vote, and of the 60% who did, a fair share of the Bush people must have
had
> doubts about the President's honesty, and the support for Kerry was
largely
> based on the hope that he was a lot different from Bush despite the fact
> that he didn't say he was.  I would guess most of us who voted held our
> nose, and the edge fell to the man whose stance was most clear.
>
> On Tuesday, as with every election I have participated in, what I wanted,
> and what I think most Americans genuinely wanted, was a moral choice.  For
> starters, I'd like to have the opportunity to make an honest choice.  I'd
> like to think that freedom of speech comes first in the Bill of Rights
> because those who drafted that document knew that the first necessity of
> freedom is honesty, a people speaking the truth as they see it.  I'm
fairly
> certain our electoral politics have never achieved that ideal, but that
> doesn't make it any less worthy of our efforts.
>
> Though the term is a dirty word for many, "politics" control the life of
all
> social creatures.  To live the way we wish to live, for our children and
> loved ones to have the opportunities we want for them, we must understand
> how to defend and nurture these goals in society.  Our moral values
should,
> then, fundamentally determine our politics.
>
> But this big money political system doesn't allow for honest politics, and
> most Americans know that.  I feel sure of this, in part, because I am a
> teacher.  When I talk about the logical fallacies, corruption and
dishonesty
> rampant in politics, students never object.  If I were to tackle such
things
> in a partisan way though, it would be a different story.  If I criticize a
> student's party, I am no longer criticizing a corrupt system; I am
> criticizing the student, and probably her mother, father, extended family
> and friends.
>
> For this reason, I think moral politics have to be discussed outside of
> partisan politics.  Americans dissatisfied with our political system have
to
> start thinking about the moral vision they believe that America should
have.
> What is our vision of the future for our children and loved ones?
>
> I know that I want a world where my child has every opportunity to flower
> into a happy, healthy, mature adult, and I know these goals are not
possible
> unless every child has the same opportunities.  As long as one child is
> privileged over another, that child will not live in security and peace,
> both of which are fundamental needs.
>
> In 1943, psychologist Abraham Maslow developed his theory of human
> motivation.  His ideas echoed those of Socrates 2500 years before as well
as
> most of the world's great philosophical and religious prophets.  While
> competition is a great motivator, the highest achievers are not simply
> trying to beat others, but they are, in fact, in pursuit of an ideal
vision.
> Maslow's famous hierarchy argues that once basic survival needs are met,
> humans strive for safety.  Once they feel safe, humans strive for love.
> When all of their lesser needs are met, people continue to strive for
> something more, self-actualization.  Maslow found such self-actualized
> personalities seek honesty, and they tend to work in service to humanity
in
> search of answers to our common problems.
>
> Now, the funny thing about the world in which we live is that many people
> who have their physiological needs met in abundance never find themselves
> meeting many other needs in the hierarchy, while many of those who barely
> have their survival needs met serve humanity most honestly and
> constructively.  I believe much of this has to do with the fundamental
> denial at the heart of our society.  It is hard to face the real reasons
why
> some people have more than others and why many of us live in relative
> comfort while a thousand of our brothers and sisters on this planet (most
of
> them children) will starve to death in the next hour.  Our conscience can
> only bear so much reality, particularly if we have no hope for solutions.
>
> But the strength of the fully flowering personality-whether that person
> lives on the street or in a mansion-is a belief that problems do have a
> solution and that we, as individuals, have a real role in finding those
> solutions.  A friend of mine sent me a list of five freedoms that are
> characteristic of functional family systems.  I think they are fundamental
> to envisioning a moral political system.
>
> 1. The freedom to see and hear what is here, instead of what should be,
> was, or will be.
> 2. The freedom to say what you feel and think, instead of what you
> should.
> 3. The freedom to feel what you feel, instead of what you ought.
> 4. The freedom to ask for what you want, instead of always waiting for
> permission.
> 5. The freedom to take risks in your own behalf, instead of choosing to
> be only "secure" and not rock the boat.
>
> No sane person can disagree that we live in a deeply troubled world.  We
are
> faced with problems that threaten to overwhelm us.  To face down these
> problems, we must embrace these five freedoms, which allow for a truthful
> account of reality from each individual's perspective, honesty about our
> subjective reactions to that reality and the personal stability to stand
up
> for one's needs and desires.  The only real chance we have of creating a
> world where each individual has the ability to flower is if we work to
> create a world where those freedoms are fundamental.
>
> So what would a moral version of politics look like?  It would
> embrace individual freedom as a fundamental necessity to achieving the
> greater good.  It would also ensure that our survival needs are secure.
We
> would provide quality health care for the 45 million Americans who have no
> health insurance.  We would feed the 30 million Americans who are hungry.
> An America that wanted to end terrorism would do everything in its power
to
> ensure that the rest of the world also had these needs met.
>
> If America's politics were founded on moral integrity, we would be
> seen as the champion of freedom throughout the world instead of the 5th of
> the world's population that consumes 30% of the world's resources.  As a
> nation that celebrates reason, we would show ourselves to be focused on
> solving our global problems with the open and honest input of our brothers
> and sisters worldwide.  As a nation that likes to say it is based on
> Christian principles, we would give our cloak to the man who steals our
> coat, and we would remember that whatever we do to the weakest of our
> brothers and sisters is harmful to all.
>
> We would insist on our equal value as siblings sharing this planet,
> and we would insist on understanding one another.  We would not only want
to
> be heard but we would want to hear.  For all of these reasons, to solve
the
> problems that lie ahead of us, we must have a political strategy based in
> these values--freedom, honesty, compassion, justice, equality and reason.
> Not the cornerstones of our political parties, these moral values are the
> cornerstones of the future.
>
> As I write this, 1460 days lie between the moral poverty of the 2004
> election and our next national election.  I have no hope that the two
party
> system, as it exists, will become morally centered in that time.  It costs
> 440 million dollars to run for President.  The top 1% of Americans make
> 15.5% of America's income, and we have the widest income gap between rich
> and poor since the Great Depression.  It's not hard to see whose interests
> dictate these elections, and that will not change within the structure of
> the two party system.
>
> No, the best I can hope for over the next 1460 days is that
> Americans begin to do the hard brick-by-brick work of creating a political
> organization or an alliance of such organizations designed to promote
these
> cornerstone moral values.
>
> One such organization is the Labor Party, which was formed only 8
> years ago but consists of thousands of local unions-representing over two
> million workers as well as thousands of individual members and other
> organizations, including the Kensington Welfare Rights Union
<www.kwru.org>
> , the group of homeless and poor families who have spearheaded the Poor
> People's Economic Human Rights Campaign.  With its call for economic
justice
> and campaigns for just health care <www.justhealthcare.org> and free
higher
> education <www.freehighered.org>, the Labor Party is an organization built
> in opposition to the top down corporate interests of the two party system.
> For this reason and more, it should be nurtured to thrive and help us
build
> real alternatives to the humiliation of our dishonest two party system.
>
> We all need to think about the threats to freedom, honesty,
> compassion, equality and reason that surround us every day, and we should
> work with those organizations (or build those organizations) that can
> address those issues.  But we should also take advantage of those larger
> networks already in place striving for these same goals.  Given the choice
> between good and evil (as opposed to the lesser of two evils), most people
> will make the right choice, but we have to build those choices, and the
time
> has come today.
>
> Danny Alexander
>
>
>
>