Tuesday, November 9, 2010

Let's be honest about something

In my brief time on this planet, I've discovered a lot of what (I like to think) are basic truths about people and how they function.  I see a lot of parallels is the way people and other social animals behave, even as we often point to their behaviour (<--Canadian spelling creeping into my vocabulary) as a reason they are "worth less" than us.  One trait gets a lot of finger pointing, and I felt motivated to write on it a bit:  self-interest.

Everyone has heard the old adage, "the love of money is the root of all evil."  I happen to disagree with it, if only because I regard the love of money as one specific instance of a broader problem, which is love of self above all else.  Certainly, loving and looking out for yourself are natural enough traits and one could hardly expect natural selection to function without them.  But isn't being able to put someone else's interests ahead of your own the mark of a mind that can truly function in the abstract?  I'm not talking about simple biological family connections, either.  I'm talking about being able to extend the social group you provide this "them first" altruism for- extending it as far as you consciously want it to go.  I think that is one of the fundamental traits of an intelligent mind.  So why do we consistently fail at it?

I was able to watch the CPAC footage of the vote in Ottawa on the C440 bill to allow war resisters to apply for permanent residence in Canada.  It was very narrowly defeated, but watching the vote was very educational for me.  Several votes happened that night, and only one party on the floor behaved the same way every time.  Every vote, the Conservatives were like a machine.  If the rules of the House allowed it, I have no doubt they would rise and sit to cast their votes in perfect synch with the Prime Minister.  I hesitate to attribute this to pure altruistic behaviour, and the larger issue of the importance of obedience in the conservative mindset is something that deserves more than the passing mention I can afford in this post, but the result is the same.  There is certainly a measure of putting someone else first in their lock-step mentality.  I won't pretend to know the precise mix of obedience to the party and its leader versus an unselfish desire to truly do something for someone else at cost to self, but the result of that equation is a real and palpable thing when you watch voting take place on the floor of the House of Commons.  To lesser degrees, both the NDP and le Bloc Québécois seem to be able to muster a similar sentiment, being parties more or less united behind a common cause.

Then we look to the Liberal Party, and what begins to happen?  On the outside, we see lots of things and people we can point fingers at, such as Michael Ignatieff's last minute reversal in his support for war resisters at the C440 vote, or Maurizio Bevilacqua basically selling his MP seat to the Conservatives to get himself a mayoral posting. If you take each issue and strip it down to its nuts and bolts, the thing you find underneath is always the same: self interest.  I'm looking out for me and mine.  And we blame them, don't we?  We get angry, call them wishy-washy, and pretend the Liberal Party has no moral compass or backbone.  In fact, even if such a generalization could be fairly applied to every Liberal, it would ignore the truth- there is a moral compass there in the ones we take issue with, but it seems to point at "me and mine" for each of them, instead of "the right thing to do".  Why?  Because they are no different than we are.

Let me emphasize that last point:  They are no different than we are.  By "they", I mean "most Liberals", and by "we", I mean "most politically-active leftists".  Let me paint a picture for you.  If you happen to be active in social justice issues, this will be something you've seen all too much of.  Something Important is coming up.  The folks who attend every meeting for our little organization (whichever it might be) realize that they will need a mountain of support for Something Important, and so the call goes out across email and phone lists.  We get to our first meeting, and get excited to see all the extra faces ready to help out the cause.  Then, as the meeting progresses, someone interjects about how their input isn't being fairly considered in light of how they went out of their way to come to this stupid meeting.  We make it a little further, and someone else wants to derail the proceedings for a bit and wax poetic about how Unrelated Issue is actually at the center of Something Important, and should be given centre stage.  After a few events like this, a meeting can feel like it's devolving into chaos quickly.  But again, let's take a step back and look at the big picture.  Whether it's someone using a lot of unnecessary words to say "look at me," or someone saying "this is important to everyone because it's important to me," that treacherous word always sneaks in there:  me.  Let's give that a second to sink in.  If you're  an activist, compare the last public meeting you held about any given issue to the scenario above, and then imagine everyone is in their best business attire and has a vote to cast.  Are you starting to look like the Liberal caucus?  I think so.  We allow petty self-interest to fracture us, just as they allow it to fracture them.  The only difference is in scale.  They are no different than we are.

I hope you're not coming into this paragraph looking for some sort of sage advice on how to fix this.  I don't have it.  I worry that this is simply the curse that goes along with a political group that's made up principally of those that are willing to ask hard questions of authority figures, where the inclination to "go along to get along" is of intrinsically less value.  Maybe the best first step in dealing with self-interest is simply to realize how pervasive it is, and call it out when you see it- even if you see it in yourself.  Putting the group or another individual before yourself is hard work, especially when they aren't standing right in front of you.  It takes practice.  To be perfectly honest, this post started out about something far more specific, but related.  As I thought about it, I realized a broader message that I wanted to communicate first.  Something a little less about what bothers "me", and a little more about what I see as a problem for "us".

I know lots of people will read this and think to themselves, "that's not me."  I know, I know.  You're not the problem.  You don't act that way.  You always put the needs of the group ahead of yourself, and never let your ego or vanity get in the way of something important.  I'm not that easy to convince, though, and you shouldn't be, either.  Go out and prove it.  Today.

And then do it again tomorrow.

2 comments:

  1. This is a good example of how experience influences perception. There is more than one sphere of altruism, and while I can relate to your experience with some activists groups, there are other groups (ie. people who work in 'caring' professions, people who work for non-profits) that slug it out day after day, year after year.

    One of my best friends is a palliative care nurse, another best friend (there isn't really a limit on the number of best friends a person can have imo) is university educated and working for a barely livable wage at a non-profit organization. Several of my friends work for this organization, they too are university educated, and make huge financial sacrifices because they believe in the work they do.

    The third person in my trio of closest friends is very driven toward professional success and financial security, but she is very involved in her church and was one of the first people I knew to be educated about human catastrophes in other countries, specifically Rwanda. She educates herself on various needs, charities, and donates money accordingly.

    I've noticed that some activists have "shiny ball syndrom" - they throw themselves into something until the next thing comes along and then they move on.

    Curiously, the friends I just referred to are not politicially active at all. They feel compelled to do the work they do, and the work is their reward. It has nothing to do with ego, and consistently work to improve conditions for people and animals.

    It seems like your interest and focus are specific to activist groups, but there are a lot of amazing people doing amazing things every day for no recognition, not even a 'thank you'. I wonder if there's some way to integrate these types of people into activist groups?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dharma, thank you for the thought-provoking reply. I have to clarify up front that the more I re-read this particular blog post, the more it feels like an incomplete thought. I certainly don't mean to suggest that every activist I come across behaves in a way suited only to their own ends, or that even a majority do. My point is that there are enough people out there who are not really "on the bus" with their particular activist organization, for whatever reason, to seriously undermine the efforts of others.

    You are correct, of course, that the world is full of people who give in apparent selflessness. I have neither the knowledge nor the tools to analyze such noble behavior to the point that some useful nugget of data could be extracted, and help that phenomenon take root in people that lack it.

    The point stands that there is a significant fracturing in the left, and if we could find a way to deal with it we'd all be better off. Perhaps there is something worth exploring in your observation that truly altruist behavior in unhinged from political concern. Is it that lack of real political thinking that allows to right to stay so focused on issues that seem to divide the left, or is it just that there is no true correlation? There are some big and uncomfortable questions down that road.

    I like your "shiny ball syndrome" phrase, and it's an apt description of something I've seen dozens of times now. Truthfully, the entire arena of political activism is quite new to me. Coming from an environment where it is common (and expected) to discard a sense of self in favor of a communal goal, this disarray that some political action groups dissolve into if frightening to me.

    On the other hand, it makes me more thankful each passing day for people like those at the core of the War Resister Support Campaign. They are focused and determined. And it should go without saying that without them, I'd be sitting in a prison cell right now.

    ReplyDelete