It's Personal

In the midst of our country’s current multi-crisis situation we are losing track of what people want and need the most, which is recognition as valid human beings.

Changes in laws or regulations alone have not – and cannot – eliminate our culture of divisiveness. Since the Civil War we have enacted numerous new laws – including three amendments to the Constitution and the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and 1968. There have been a series demonstrations that go back to the 1963 March on Washington – some violent and some peaceful. But we have seen only incremental changes in the way that minorities are treated in our country, including by those who have been sworn to uphold our laws equally. 

Although we need new laws to curb the abuses of police, laws don’t change instinctive human behavior to see some people as dangerous or evil based on their color or background. Regulations don’t make people respect each other.
When we see others only as members of their groups we fail to recognize that their lives and individuality matter. This is what every human being seeks. Real change happens when we learn to recognize others – and interact with them – as the valuable individuals that they are. The direction our police training needs to go is toward practiced respectful interaction that leads toward overcoming our inherent prejudices. 

We need to introduce interpersonal skills training in our schools that provides children practice in relating respectfully to others. This most essential skill has long been neglected. Then similar training must be brought into every work situation that requires interpersonal skills – which is almost all of them – and especially into the workplaces of those who are expected to enforce our laws.

Training in respectful interaction with people of different backgrounds inspires us to see each other as equally valid human beings. Practice at communicating in a respectful manner generates the interpersonal attitudes and skills that are needed to move past the biases that plague our society.

We also need publicly sponsored skills training programs for those who are jobless or underemployed and have become hopeless about their lives. This will change their focus from resentment to optimism about their future. Much of the funding that goes into policing and keeping millions behind bars would be better spent teaching skills that our society needs to those caught in repetitive incarceration. 

The way out of our mire of blame is not just more new laws and regulations, or the elimination of old ones. We need to not just preach – but practice – genuine empathetic interactions with others if real change is to take place. When we adopt the view that every individual is an equally valid human being we reinstate the basic principle of human equality upon which democracy is founded. And as a bonus, when we interact respectfully with others we also experience respect for ourselves.

Real change comes only when we begin to recognize others as human beings who essentially are like ourselves. 

Steve Zolno is the author of The Future of Democracy, The Death of Democracy, and the upcoming Truth and Democracy. He has been leading study groups in democracy since 2006.



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Dobbs and Brown v. Board of Education: A Comparison

  As we mark the 50th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, I note that the supporters of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization , the decision revoking the constitutional right to an abortion, have sought to draw celebratory parallels between that decision and Brown v. Board of Education. This was the case that recognized the principle that “separate but equal” treatment of Blacks and Whites in segregated schools was incompatible with the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Like Brown , Dobbs overturned a foundational precedent that had been in force for decades, and according to anti-abortion proponents, established an important right – the right to fetal life -- denied by the discredited precedent. The Dobbs opinion itself referenced Brown a number of times, and Mitch McConnell said of the Dobbs decision: “The Court has corrected a terrible legal and moral error, like when Brown v. Board overruled Plessy v. Ferguson.”   But the differences between Brow...
Read more

Thoughts on Transgender Issues

   The treatment of transgender people is one of the most active fronts in our never-ending culture wars. Any nuance gets lost on both sides of the debate. At the risk of being caught in the cross-fire, this post attempts to formulate a sensible framework for understanding these issues.  My starting point is the affirmation of two principles. First, people should be able to express their gender identity as they wish, not in conformity with other people's ideas. That principle is rooted in the fundamental right to express oneself linked to the First Amendment protection of freedom of speech.  Second, gender dysphoria, the strong sense of belonging to a gender other than the biological gender into which one was born, is real. The causes of gender dysphoria are not well understood, but seems to have a physiological basis, at least in some  cases . From this emerges the principle that people experiencing gender dysphoria should be given “reasonable accommodation,” a...
Read more

The Supreme Court's Second Amendment Folly

  You may have seen this news item and thought it was some kind of joke. A Federal District Court in Texas, and then the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, ruled in   Rahimi v. United States , that a Texas law prohibiting people subject to domestic violence protective orders from owning guns was unconstitutional. Why? Because no such prohibition was recognized when the Second Amendment to the Constitution protecting the right to “keep and bear arms” was enacted back in 1789 or, in 1868, when the Fourteenth Amendment applied federal constitutional rights to the states. After all, these were the bad ol’ days when there was no such thing as a domestic violence protective order. This court decision was the kind of absurd news item worthy of the Onion. But it was no joke. The explanation for this bit of judicial nonsense is to be found in the Supreme Court’s decision last term,  New York Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen . Back in 2008, on a 5-4 vote, the Court decided that t...
Read more