Sunday, May 17, 2015

Power, Organization and Community: The Complex Components of Compassion

Power, Organization and Community:
The Complex Components of Compassion


Compassion is not derived only from emotion. Compassion can be derived from logic. In fact, unless compassion is understood both emotionally and logically, it cannot be sustained. Logic and emotion must have compassion for each other. Logic and emotion must love and understand each other. Logic and emotion are biological components of human anatomy. In some people logic is more developed. In others emotion is more developed. In still others it is nearly evenly balanced.

Why should this be important for people who are thinking about the relationship between the individual and the community? I can give three reasons. First, compassion, in the philosophical tradition, is a central bridge between the individual and the community; it is conceived of as our species' way of hooking the interests of others to our own personal goods. ... Second, some modern theories - liberal and individualist moral theories in particular - have treated compassion as an irrational force in human affairs, one that is likely to mislead or distract us when we are trying to think well about social policy. ... Third, this simple opposition between emotion and reason has also been invoked by communitarian critics of liberalism, who have suggested that if we are to make room for sentiments such as compassion, which do not seem to be much honored in liberal theory, this will mean basing political judgment upon a force that is affective rather than cognitive, instinctual rather than concerned with judgment and thought. ... If we want a compassionate community, we can have one without sacrificing the Enlightenment's commitment to reason and reflection - because compassion is a certain sort of reasoning. (Nussbaum (1):28)

To keep reason and emotion in constant opposition in the individual will cause the individual to be conflicted and divided against itself. A community of such individuals will inevitably be divided against itself. A divided community is a conquered community. A conquered community is, by definition, powerless.

Power is at the heart of compassion. When one finds oneself in a context which calls for compassion, power is invariably a factor in the context. "[D]ifferences in class, race, gender, wealth, and power do affect the extent to which the sense of helplessness governs the daily course of one's life." (Nussbaum (1):45) I submit that the essential difference between pity and compassion is the effect on one's balance of power. Pity is a false emotion which exacerbates a loss of power while compassion is a true emotion which restores power. In discussing Nietzsche's anti-pity, Stoic argument, "against cruelty and in favor of self-command," Martha Nussbaum writes that, a "suffering person whom one respects will, if an enemy, be regarded with admiration for the fortitude with which he bears his suffering; if a friend, he will be regarded with a delicate respect for his pride and a concern for his ability [or power] to continue creating himself." (Nussbaum (2):150) A potential target of compassion finds oneself facing a significant threat to one's balance of power. A potential source of compassion seeks to help the target regain one's balance of power.

An individual finds oneself in a context. No individual exists purely qua individual. "Man is by nature a political animal." (Aristotle, Politics, c.343 B.C.E.) Even a hermit depends upon nature. Likewise, it is impossible to achieve a pure community with absolute uniformity and synchronization of all members. Even if the difference is only being one individual as opposed to another individual. There is still a distinction between individual number 8 and individual number 9 even if the difference is only in serialization. To be a true individual requires a true community.

Man is by nature a social animal; an individual who is unsocial naturally and not accidentally is either beneath our notice or more than human. Society is something in nature that precedes the individual. Anyone who either cannot lead the common life or is so self-sufficient as not to need to, and therefore does not partake of society, is either a beast or a god. (Aristotle, Politics, c.343 B.C.E.)
Only another can offer one a different perspective on oneself and, hence, opportunity for growth. Only another can help to create novelty in one's context. Only novelty can create choices. Only choices can create power. An individual must choose from among choices oneself. In so doing one defines oneself. One can only define oneself in a community.

A true community requires organization. A true community is composed of true individuals. A false community composed of false individuals is not sustainable. False individuals cannot think independently of the community. True individuals can think independently and as a group. An assortment of individuals independent of a group approximates chaos (the many). Order (oneness) can be imposed from the top down or from the bottom up. Order is organization or complexity. In biology, the more complex the organism, the more energy it can contain and the longer it can maintain itself. (Garrison:304) The most harmonious is a self-organizing, stable, chaotic system. This would be considered a "middle-out" system versus "top-down" or "bottom-up". These systems are said to exhibit negative entropy. Entropy is a measure of inefficiency. It indicates how likely a system is to dissipate or maintain energy. Negative entropy represents a gain of energy generated from within.

Community is simply the biological, human organization of groups of humans. Other species exhibit degrees of communal behavior -- wolves, lions, dolphins, whales, etc.. -- but, here, we are concerned only with human community. Community can be considered from the local to the global levels. Energy, or power, is generated by individuals and either dissipates or is collected and held by community. An individual has only a finite capacity or potential to store power. However, a community can store power greater than the sum of the power of its parts. If power is not collected at one level of community then it dissipates and is collected in the next nearest community it encounters.

When a given community fails to collect power, another community gains access to that power and the resultant differential in power increases the probability of actualization of that power by one community against the other. One must consider the various degrees of community in various contexts. In the state of nature, one is closest to the elements and other species. A small group of humans in the wilds constitutes one degree of community. A minimal degree. Each member carries a larger portion of the overall load of maintaining a community. For example, if one member is careless and cuts oneself or breaks one's leg the rest of the community must decide whether to carry the individual and to care for the individual. This slows the community down and poses a threat to the community by possibly attracting predators to the smell of blood. The negligence of the individual threatens the entire community. They become more vulnerable to either elements, predators, or other communities of humans. It is possible that by bearing the risk of carrying this negligent individual, the community benefits from the mutual commitment to each other forged by this effort. However, they must weigh the risk against the potential benefit.

As communities establish themselves against the elements and predator species, the only internal threats are from negligent individuals or groups of individuals. The only external threats are from other human communities. There may be conflicts over resources or direct physical conflict. The strength and cohesion of one community versus another depend upon its organization and maximization of resources -- human and material. Internally, conflicts may occur over various issues. The greater the disparity of power from group to group the less stable the overall community and the more vulnerable it is to attack from without.

Any discussion of submitting to the risks of life's vicissitudes and opening oneself up emotionally to human relationships (Nussbaum (1):43) only becomes viable in the cave (the community) where the women waited with the children for the men to return from hunting sabertooth tigers and woolly mammoths. This possibility of humanity or compassion can only take place in community. The hunters in the wilds cannot afford to risk humanity and compassion except in very limited and controlled measure. Perhaps anyone - male, female, or other - when faced with a context which is potentially emotionally overwhelming and paralyzing and is forced to suspend social emotion and engage in an instinctual, animal, fight or flight mode of operating.

Yet, community is not possible without compassion. Compassion can only take place in a protected context. Ironically, at least at one point in human development, compassion in some humans posed a threat to community and compassion in others. Some humans had to move from worlds where compassion meant life to worlds where compassion meant death and back again. Somehow sense had to be made of this. It seems that to this day this same confused dynamic is yet to be resolved. For some, the comfort of compassion and the safety of society represent a baited trap. Nietzsche seemed torn between the wildness of our animal nature and the compassion of our mammalian nature. He struggled mightily against the biological and social pressures to abandon our animal nature in favor of our compassionate nature.

Lacking external enemies and resistances, and confined within an oppressive narrowness and regularity, man began rending, persecuting, terrifying himself, like a wild beast hurling itself against the bars of its cage. This languisher, devoured by nostalgia for the desert, who had to turn himself into an adventure, a torture chamber, an insecure and dangerous wilderness-this fool, this pining and desperate prisoner, became the inventor of "bad conscience." Also the generator of the greatest and most disastrous maladies, of which humanity has not to this day been cured: his sickness of himself, brought on by the violent severance from his animal past, by his sudden leap and fall into new layers and conditions of existence, by his declaration of war against the old instincts that had hitherto been the foundation of his power, his joy, and his awesomeness. (GM II:XVI)

To his credit, he had the courage to wrestle with this problem in his cerebral cortex, the uniquely human section of the brain. In this sense, and, no doubt, many others, Nietzsche was Human, All Too Human. The cerebral cortex is the seat of both creativity and of reason. This human part of the brain is where problem-solving takes place. (Restak:417) To be human is to be a creator, a problem-solver, compassionate, and an animal. Additionally, to be human is to be communal. To be compassionate is to recognize this fact. Noone can transcend oneself without the community of others, not even Nietzsche. For the individual to transcend, the community must transcend. This requires organization. It is a major logistical problem to get the community across the bridge of transcendence.

It is also a major psychological problem to get the community across the bridge of transcendence. One way people adapt to suffering is internalization of oppression. By accepting one's suffering as inevitable, one learns to live with suffering. One eventually forgets that one's context is to be transcended.

Suffering and deprivation are usually not ennobling or educative; they more often brutalize or corrupt perception. In particular, they often produce adaptive responses that deny the importance of the suffering; such adaptive responses are especially likely to arise when the deprivation is connected to oppression and hierarchy, and taught as proper through religious and cultural practices. (Nussbaum (1):32)

To reverse this requires organization and community. To introduce new information, new experience, and new culture cannot be established or sustained without organization and community. Absent this, other parts of community will prevail which have the power, organization, and community to sustain themselves and the ability to impose themselves on weaker communities.

The members of the weaker community may have long ago lost the concept of having the power to organize itself and create itself. Worst of all, whole new slave communities can be created by master communities. The master community can dominate the slave community by creating it upon an entirely blank slate. The slave community is thus made entirely dependent upon the master community. As power dissipates from the slave community to the master community so does the humanity and the compassion. Members of the slave community are reduced to their animal natures. Basic needs drive the culture of the slave community -- hunger, thirst, shelter, sex -- basic instincts. Internally, the slaves live in the animal base of the brain where fight or flight instincts, aggression, territoriality, and the willingness to follow leaders blindly also reside. Externally, the slaves live in a herd, corralled as it were. If the herd stampedes it could kill the masters directly, but the herd is only reactive and cannot control and direct its own stampede. The masters would starve without the herd to prey upon. Hence, the masters and the slaves are codependent.

According to Harold Lasswell in Power and Personality, there are five basic human needs: survival, security, social, self-esteem, and self-realization. (Lasswell) Maximum love and understanding of oneself require all needs to be fully met. Compassion requires love and understanding of oneself and others. The five basic needs can be grouped to reflect the basic biological structure and development of individuals and of society as a whole. An individual can be said to consist of three essential elements: animal, mammalian, and human. The animal element corresponds to survival and security needs. The mammalian element corresponds to social needs. The human element corresponds to self-esteem and self-realization needs. Similarly, power relates to survival and security needs; organization relates to security and social needs; community relates to social, self-esteem, and self-realization needs. The relationship between master and slave is inherently about power. Similarly, the ability of the creator type to create oneself and one's context is a function of power. If master, slave, and creator are the three essential classes of society, then power is the essential factor in social dynamics since each of these classes can be defined as a particular power dynamic within the overall social context.

Power manifests itself in three essential forms: numbers, organization, and resources. A community is a collection of a number of individuals organized into a set of classes around a set of values and decision-making procedures which determines the macrocontext for the flow of power and resources. The decisions of individual members of the community determines the microcontext for the flow of power and resources. The level of power of an individual or group of individuals is a major factor in predicting the likelihood of that individual or group of individuals becoming a potential target of compassion. Other factors, such as natural disasters, would fall essentially at a constant level over all classes of individuals. That is, "the difference between the vulnerabilities common to all human beings and those constructed for the powerless by the empowered." (Nussbaum (1):41) Without power, organization and community -- the complex components of compassion -- one is simply naked, alone, and at the mercy of nature and predators.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Birth of Tragedy and The Genealogy of Morals. Trans. Francis Golffing. New York: Anchor Books, 1956.

Nussbaum (1), Martha. "Compassion: The Basic Social Emotion," Social Philosophy and Policy. Cambridge University Press (UK). Winter, 1996. Pp. 27-58.

Nussbaum (2), Martha. "Pity and Mercy Nietzsche's Stoicism," Nietzsche. Genealogy, Morality: Essays on Nietzsche's Genealogy of Morals. Ed. Richard Schact. University of California Press, 1994. Pp. 139-167.

Restak, Richard. The Brain: The Last Frontier. New York: Warner Books, 1979.

Lasswell, Harold D.. Power and Personality. New York: The Viking Press, 1969.

Garrison, Tom. Oceanography: An Invitation to Marine Science. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Co., 1996.



Saturday, May 16, 2015

Where We, the People, Have Been, Where We are, and Where We Need to Go

Where We, the People, Have Been, Where We are, and Where We Need to Go

By Ed Democracy


Where We, the People, Need to Go


We, the people, need to teach each other how to organize sustainably to keep our power where it originates - WITH US! - so that we, the people, can use our power when we need it for our local human good purposes - "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".



Where We, the People, are, Now


We, the people, are thoroughly divided & conquered by the many ideologies to which we subscribe in an effort to make sense of the world.  Almost all of them make some sense here & there, while none of them is sufficient to guide humanity through a sustainable future.  None of these worldviews (...these -isms) can be said to be OF the people, BY the people, and FOR the people. Therefore, we, the people, must embark on a process to gather common people to create a common worldview based on common human needs using common sense and common decency to create a new social contract.  This process must use the best of the old ( democracy 1.0 ) - townhall-style meetings - with the best of the new ( democracy 2.0 ) - internet, social media, teleconferencing, etc..  The process must be transparent & inclusive for all who would like to participate in developing a social contract OF the people, BY the people, and FOR the people!  Unless and until, we, the people, embark on this process and make enough forward progress to break the inertia of current events to get on our own course under our own steam (or sail) in our own vessel - until then - we will remain a prisoner of events under the boots of bureaucratic tyrants!  To this end, I am developing  AmericanCommons.com to begin this process.
 

Where We, the People, Have Been


Here are a few pieces - excerpts & links by/on Rousseau, Hume, Kant, Russell, and Chomsky - providing the historical depth of background necessary to contextualize and clarify the meaning of the current text of human history in which we, the people, find ourselves.  Also, an interview piece with Chomsky referencing what he calls, "Hume's Paradox".
Force and Opinion
Noam Chomsky
Z Magazine, July-August, 1991
...


The Untamed Rabble
Hume's paradox of government arises only if we suppose that a crucial element of essential human nature is what Bakunin called "an instinct for freedom." It is the failure to act upon this instinct that Hume found surprising. The same failure inspired Rousseau's classic lament that people are born free but are everywhere in chains, seduced by the illusions of the civil society that is created by the rich to guarantee their plunder. Some may adopt this assumption as one of the "natural beliefs" that guide their conduct and their thought. There have been efforts to ground the instinct for freedom in a substantive theory of human nature. They are not without interest, but they surely come nowhere near establishing the case. Like other tenets of common sense, this belief remains a regulative principle that we adopt, or reject, on faith. Which choice we make can have large-scale effects for ourselves and others.
Those who adopt the common sense principle that freedom is our natural right and essential need will agree with Bertrand Russell that anarchism is "the ultimate ideal to which society should approximate." Structures of hierarchy and domination are fundamentally illegitimate. They can be defended only on grounds of contingent need, an argument that rarely stands up to analysis. As Russell went on to observe 70 years ago, "the old bonds of authority" have little intrinsic merit. Reasons are needed for people to abandon their rights, "and the reasons offered are counterfeit reasons, convincing only to those who have a selfish interest in being convinced." "The condition of revolt," he went on, "exists in women towards men, in oppressed nations towards their oppressors, and above all in labour towards capital. It is a state full of danger, as all past history shows, yet also full of hope."
Russell traced the habit of submission in part to coercive educational practices. His views are reminiscent of 17th and 18th century thinkers who held that the mind is not to be filled with knowledge "from without, like a vessel," but "to be kindled and awaked." "The growth of knowledge [resembles] the growth of Fruit; however external causes may in some degree cooperate, it is the internal vigour, and virtue of the tree, that must ripen the juices to their just maturity." Similar conceptions underlie Enlightenment thought on political and intellectual freedom, and on alienated labor, which turns the worker into an instrument for other ends instead of a human being fulfilling inner needs -- a fundamental principle of classical liberal thought, though long forgotten, because of its revolutionary implications. These ideas and values retain their power and their pertinence, though they are very remote from realization, anywhere. As long as this is so, the libertarian revolutions of the 18th century remain far from consummated, a vision for the future.


One might take this natural belief to be confirmed by the fact that despite all efforts to contain them, the rabble continue to fight for their fundamental human rights. And over time, some libertarian ideals have been partially realized or have even become common coin. Many of the outrageous ideas of the 17th century radical democrats, for example, seem tame enough today, though other early insights remain beyond our current moral and intellectual reach.


...
The same failure inspired Rousseau's classic lament that people are born free but are everywhere in chains, seduced by the illusions of the civil society that is created by the rich to guarantee their plunder.
[THE SOCIAL CONTRACT OR PRINCIPLES OF POLITICAL RIGHT
by Jean Jacques Rousseau (1762) Translated 1782 by G. D. H. Cole, public domain]


=======================================


[ Chomsky interviewed by David Barsamian]
You've said the real drama since 1776 has been the "relentless attack of the prosperous few upon the rights of the restless many." I want to ask you about the "restless many." Do they hold any cards?
Sure. They've won a lot of victories. The country is a lot more free than it was two hundred years ago. For one thing, we don't have slaves. That's a big change. Thomas Jefferson's goal, at the very left-liberal end of the spectrum, was to create a country "free of blot or mixture" -- meaning no red Indians, no black people, just good white Anglo-Saxons. That's what the liberals wanted.
They didn't succeed. They did pretty much get rid of the native population -- they almost succeeded in "exterminating" them (as they put it in those days) -- but they couldn't get rid of the black population, and over time they've had to incorporate them in some fashion into society.
Freedom of speech has been vastly extended. Women finally received the franchise 150 years after the revolution. After a very bloody struggle, workers finally won some rights in the 1930s -- about fifty years after they did in Europe. (They've been losing them ever since, but they won them to some extent.)
In many ways large parts of the general population have been integrated into the system of relative prosperity and relative freedom -- almost always as a result of popular struggle. So the general population has lots of cards.
That's something that [English philosopher] David Hume pointed out a couple of centuries ago. In his work on political theory, he describes the paradox that, in any society, the population submits to the rulers, even though force is always in the hands of the governed.
Ultimately the governors, the rulers, can only rule if they control opinion -- no matter how many guns they have. This is true of the most despotic societies and the most free, he wrote. If the general population won't accept things, the rulers are finished.


That underestimates the resources of violence, but expresses important truths nonetheless. There's a constant battle between people who refuse to accept domination and injustice and those who are trying to force people to accept them.
...
[ ED:  So I went to research the original Hume for more depth & background.  Here is an excerpt of a 5-page piece by Hume where he covers about 5,000 years of human history with the few controlling the many via manipulation of opinion as referenced by Chomsky, above: ]


ESSAYS, MORAL AND POLITICAL. (1741-1742, 1777)


by David Hume
NOTHING appears more surprizing to those, who consider human affairs with a philosophical eye, than the easiness with which the many are governed by the few; and the implicit submission, with which men resign their own sentiments and passions to those of their rulers. When we enquire by what means this wonder is effected, we shall find, that, as Force is always on the side of the governed, the governors have nothing to support them but opinion. It is therefore, on opinion only that government is founded; and this maxim extends to the most despotic and most military governments, as well as to the most free and most popular. The soldan of Egypt, or the emperor of Rome, might drive his harmless subjects, like brute beasts, against their sentiments and inclination: But he must, at least, have led his mamalukes, or praetorian bands, like men, by their opinion.
...


==========================================


[ ED: Here's an excerpt from the Kant piece we have discussed:]


IMMANUEL KANT


Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed immaturity. Immaturity is the inability to use one's understanding without guidance from another. This immaturity is self-imposed when its cause lies not in lack of understanding, but in lack of resolve and courage to use it without guidance from another. Sapere Aude! [dare to know] "Have courage to use your own understanding!"--that is the motto of enlightenment.
Laziness and cowardice are the reasons why so great a proportion of men, long after nature has released them from alien guidance (naturaliter maiorennes), nonetheless gladly remain in lifelong immaturity, and why it is so easy for others to establish themselves as their guardians. It is so easy to be immature. If I have a book to serve as my understanding, a pastor to serve as my conscience, a physician to determine my diet for me, and so on, I need not exert myself at all. I need not think, if only I can pay: others will readily undertake the irksome work for me. The guardians who have so benevolently taken over the supervision of men have carefully seen to it that the far greatest part of them (including the entire fair sex) regard taking the step to maturity as very dangerous, not to mention difficult. Having first made their domestic livestock dumb, and having carefully made sure that these docile creatures will not take a single step without the go-cart to which they are harnessed, these guardians then show them the danger that threatens them, should they attempt to walk alone. Now this danger is not actually so great, for after falling a few times they would in the end certainly learn to walk; but an example of this kind makes men timid and usually frightens them out of all further attempts.
Thus, it is difficult for any individual man to work himself out of the immaturity that has all but become his nature. He has even become fond of this state and for the time being is actually incapable of using his own understanding, for no one has ever allowed him to attempt it. Rules and formulas, those mechanical aids to the rational use, or rather misuse, of his natural gifts, are the shackles of a permanent immaturity. Whoever threw them off would still make only an uncertain leap over the smallest ditch, since he is unaccustomed to this kind of free movement. Consequently, only a few have succeeded, by cultivating their own minds, in freeing themselves from immaturity and pursuing a secure course.
But that the public should enlighten itself is more likely; indeed, if it is only allowed freedom, enlightenment is almost inevitable. For even among the entrenched guardians of the great masses a few will always think for themselves, a few who, after having themselves thrown off the yoke of immaturity, will spread the spirit of a rational appreciation for both their own worth and for each person's calling to think for himself. But it should be particularly noted that if a public that was first placed in this yoke by the guardians is suitably aroused by some of those who are altogether incapable of enlightenment, it may force the guardians themselves to remain under the yoke--so pernicious is it to instill prejudices, for they finally take revenge upon their originators, or on their descendants. Thus a public can only attain enlightenment slowly. Perhaps a revolution can overthrow autocratic despotism and profiteering or power-grabbing oppression, but it can never truly reform a manner of thinking; instead, new prejudices, just like the old ones they replace, will serve as a leash for the great unthinking mass.
...
[SOURCE URL:


IMMANUEL KANT
An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment? (1784)


[ WIKIpedia entry on Kant piece:

Tuesday, April 14, 2015

Dear #Hillary2016 aka $2.5B Scooby Van Chipotle Champion

Dear #Hillary2016 aka $2.5B Scooby Van Chipotle Champion:

We, the people, need all the help we can get.  

We do need our interests represented in the power grid.

We need a President of the United States of America.

We need a President who will not easily and happily compromise on our interests.

You are running for the Democratic Nomination for President.

You are not running for Champion of the working people.

We need a President who understands how democracy works.  

We need a President who understands how to develop a culture of democracy.

We need a President who understands that citizens need a system of self-government.

We need a President who understands how much systemic change needs to happen for viable self-government to be sustainable.

We need a President who understands how much time it takes to engage in self-government.

We need a President who understands how much practice we will need at true self-government.

We need a President who understands how much we need to not be dependent on a champion to manage our affairs for us.

Yet, we sure as god-damned hell are not democratically competent to manage our own affairs.

So, for now, we need an honest broker who knows political Kung Fu.  This is true.  

Sorry, but, champion just smells cheesy & sounds tinny & it just does not resonate in any good way on any level.

We have a cheesy & tinny Democratic Party gunking up inboxes with cracker crumbs & spray-can cheese ... what's it called? ... "cheese whiz"? ... "snack-mate"? ... 

But, there's a solid gold money-machine that sucks everything!  It would vacuum under America's car seats & sofa cushions via our inboxes if it could!  It sucks!  Bullshit petition pretenses for money!  

Honestly, I think you are out of touch and in for a schooling.  

By all means, run, fight, win!  Someone sure as hell better!

You can do the money math & the vote math.  

You know you need every god-damned dollar and every god-damned vote.

That should be enough to keep you honest and keep you off the streets & out of trouble.  

...unless you get too desperate and get in over your head in unfamiliar water...

Hearts & minds!  That's the difficult math! 

We have had Hope & Change turned to Nope & NO Change!

Yes, those mean SOBs started right in on November 9, 2008: NO! NO! NO! Nothing for Obama! Nothing! Ever!

... and the sick bastards cannot stop to this very crazy second!  

That Obama has done as much as he has and is still fighting is more than a grownup could ever have hoped for.  

A grownup knows this is about as good as it gets without real true democracy.  I thank President Obama for his service  He certainly has earned this citizen's respect and loyalty.

But, the kids thought we had a champion - even though he never called himself our "champion" ... of course, that would have brought to mind the movie, "Black Knight" with Martin Lawrence - very, very funny!  ... just not Presidential... & cheesy & tinny, anyway...

The grownups knew that champion after champion will get mowed down by this system one after another - forever!  Even a Chicago champion with a Chicago crew would do well to fight to a draw!

The grownups know the facts of life.

The grownups know how little we really know as a culture about true democracy.

The grownups know how little hope & change we will ever have unless & until we achieve true democracy.

The grownups know how little any number of champions can do to get us true democracy.

The grownups know how only, we, the people, can achieve true democracy for ourselves by practicing & fighting & practicing & fighting & never ever quitting until we achieve more true democracy and until our children keep practicing & fighting & practicing & fighting and never ever quit until they achieve more true democracy and until their children keep practicing & fighting & practicing & fighting and never ever quit until they achieve more true democracy...

The grownups know how few people really know this and how even fewer know enough to care and how fewer still have the skills and the time to practice them let alone anyone to practice them with.

Please, lose the champion crap!

Just run, fight, and win!

Beat the mean-machine and give us a fair chance to develop the democracy we need and that our children need even more!

Thank you!

Sincerely,

Ed Democracy



Saturday, February 28, 2015

HOW I LANDED ON THE POOR FARM HISTORY PROJECT

HOW I LANDED ON THE POOR FARM HISTORY PROJECT

I first heard about "poor farms" when, in the late 1990's, I was listening to the John McDonald radio show (SAT & SUN 6am-10am on WGAN 560 AM).  I cannot remember the overall topic, but, a caller with a thick Maine accent made a passing reference saying, "yuh, n'course you remembah the ol' poor farm over t' Cape 'lizbeth right by the town line, theya...", to which, the host, John McDonald, replied, "Yuh, yuh, 'course I do."  The caller and the conversation returned to the original topic.

Meanwhile, I was thinking, "Wait! Wait! What? "Poor Farm?!"  "Cape Elizabeth?!" "What? What was that?  When was that? ... a poor farm in Cape Elizabeth? There were poor people in Cape Elizabeth?"

Then, not long after, there was a small "blurb" in the Portland Press Herald about a grant-funded project to microfilm some logbooks from a Portland Poor Farm!  The project was to be carried out by Abraham Schecter.  The original documents and microfilm would reside at the Maine Historical Society library.  Abraham is now the Archivist at the Portland Public Library.  He is a very friendly and enthusiastic neighborhood historian and can be found warmly greeting all who enter the Portland Room on the 3rd Floor of the Portland Public Library.

I soon went into the Brown Library at the Maine Historical Society.  The librarian on duty was none other than William Barry, among Portland and Maine's preeminent historians.  I told him what brought me there.  He brought me the box containing the original Portland Poor Farm logbooks and a pair of white gloves.  It was a ledger listing names, ages, dates, and reasons for internment - all manner of medical, physical, mental, social, and economical malady.

A one-stop drop for the maladjusted.  From what I soon gathered, while some sounded close to a back-to-the-land intentional community, most sounded closer to forced labor camps or concentration camps.

I told William Barry I had talked with some of my Labor Ready compatriots about this crazy thing I heard about a poor farm in Cape Elizabeth!  One guy, as it happened, was homeless, but temporarily quartered at a home in Cape Elizabeth!  He said I'm staying right near the library!  I go in there all the time! The ladies from the historical society would probably be happy to help with research.  Another coworker, who "slept rough", worked hard, and was full of history and stories (Korean War VET) had heard of poor farms and wanted to find out more, too.  

We talked all week about how we all wanted to get out of the rat race and wanted to collaborate on a book about poor farm history.  We knew there must be people like us in every town who would like to collaborate.  

William Barry told me that the history was virtually untouched.  He said, "In fact, the only thing published, that I am aware of, are references I made to poor farms, town farms, alms houses, and the like, which I encountered while writing my book on the history of the Sweetser Homes in Maine."  He brought me a copy of his book.  He said he only mentioned them in passing as they related to the Sweetser Homes. He said the history was wide open and has been badly neglected.  He told me that the concept and the practice of poor farms came directly from the Elizabethan Poor Laws and that, at the time, this was viewed as an enormous humanitarian advance over the treatment of the poor under the Tudors - work or die!  Under the Elizabethan Poor Laws, those unable to work and support themselves would be shipped back to their town of origin which would be responsible for their care.

I told my Labor Ready compadres what I learned.  They were in!  I told them about a really great sociology professor I knew who had written books about poverty and homelessness and how he worked with the poor right here in Portland.  I went to talk with him. I told him what I had learned, shared some notes, and asked him if he would like to participate on this collaborative research and writing project with some homeless & working poor folks?  He said he would think about it.

My coworkers & I were robbed by a sociology professor, no less, of some original research - verbatim - while sharing a concept for a proposed joint research & writing project by homeless, working homeless, near-homeless, etc. people who have also started researching poor farms!  I was asking him for his participation & help with writing, editing, publishing, etc. ... he helped himself to the concept and added a book to his own personal professional publishing portfolio! HYPOCRITE!  THIEF!  Never heard a word from him.  Then I saw the book and read some of my own words (verbatim) and concepts! 

Publish or Perish?  Publish AND perish!

Obviously, this sort of thing sticks with you - for many reasons!  Chief among them, is the power of the history.  So much history, yet, so quiet!  It is everywhere, and it is nowhere!  It makes no sense, and it makes perfect sense!  This history explains the underlying attitudes toward poverty and the human beings who experience poverty.  We cannot really understand it, we cannot really make poverty go away, we cannot really make poor people go away.  But, we do have some less inhumane ways of dealing with poverty and the human beings who experience poverty.  And, we can let sleeping historical dog lie.  Lie by ommission.  Whistle past the graveyard.  Oh, don't worry. It probably won't be a poor farm graveyard - they usually did not have graveyards, per se.  For example, the Portland Alms House remains - as they could be found - were relocated to a mass grave in the Forest Gardens Cemetary in South Portland.

So, when I started this, I had just served honorably in the US Navy (1993-1996).  Got out and finished by BA in Philosophy at USM (1999).  I was homeless, for some time while I was finishing.  I was working like a dog to not be homeless again when this all started.  I have been homeless several times since.  I continue to work like a dog to not be homeless again.  The antisocial sociology professor represents the systematized worker rape of the current system.  The fight continues for a system of humanity, by humanity, and for humanity!

This history still needs to be unearthed.  The lessons still must be learned. The old adage is true: If we do not learn from history, we are doomed to repeat it.  

History, despite its wrenching pain
cannot be unlived, but if faced
With Courage, need not be lived again.

                 – MAYA ANGELOU, Inaugural poem (1993)
                   “On the Pulse of Morning”