In
the current version of the “stump sermon” that I deliver in
congregations, I begin my delineating Kansas Interfaith Action's four
mission areas (racism, poverty, violence, climate disruption) and
conclude by proposing four corresponding values that can guide our
work as we try to bring the voice of faith and conscience into public
policy advocacy.
This
last piece has gone through numerous iterations since I first gave
the sermon on MLK Sunday of this year. (Shout out to Rainbow
Mennonite Church in KCK.) For one of these values in particular I've
had trouble finding the words that capture precisely the tone and
meaning I'm trying to set.
Let me pause here to say that the recent election results have thrown everybody for the mother of all loops. Anger, fear, hatred, grim determination are some responses I've seen, and then there are other people besides me also. (Rimshot.) Progressives are cycling rapidly through the stages of grief, with a long doting pause on “anger.” The empowerment of the racist subculture on the right is particularly frightening and enraging (which are the same thing, or course).
The
value I've been having trouble articulating is what MLK called
“love.” There are plenty of quotes from King and his followers
about loving the racist white cop as he was bringing the truncheon
down on your head. But I don't think that resonates today, because a)
it sounds 60s-archaic, like singing “Kumbaya,”* b) it sounds
waaay too Christian for me personally and (therefore) for the interfaith
setting, but most importantly, c) it sets a standard that is
impossible for most of us mortals to meet. King is one thing, Gandhi
is one thing, but we, my friends, are neither Gandhi nor King, and
when people were coming up to me after the sermon and saying, “How
in the world am I supposed to love Donald Trump?” I didn't really
have a good answer for them. And that was before the election.
*
In his interview with Krista Tippett the great movement activist and
educator Vincent Harding gave a full-throated defense of the song
“Kumbaya.” The story he tells is worth hearing, but it doesn't
change my thoughts here.
So
then I tried the term “compassion.” It's a good Buddhist term,
politically neutral, and compassion practice is something that we
can all do (it's called “metta” and I can recommend some good
recorded meditations on it if you're interested). And actually, I
kinda sorta find it possible to find some grain-of-rice-sized kernel
of compassion for someone like Trump – I suspect his father was not
a very nice man – but that it might only work on the cushion and
isn't a strategy for meaningful action in the world.
So
the way I've been framing this lately is as “non-hatred.” I
think that's something we all can accomplish. Whatever you think of
the persons or actions or Trump, or Sam Brownback, or Charles Koch –
or the run-of-the-mill Trump voter – I will posit to you that
hatred is a useless emotion. It doesn't feed anyone, or elect anyone,
or stop a pipeline, or empower you or anyone else in any way. The
activist, author and radio host Rivera Sun likens hatred to holding a
bee in your hand – it only hurts you.
Framed
it this way, as "non-hatred," makes it seem like something
anyone could attain, or at least work toward as a realistic goal.
Whatever
it is I'm talking about here, I do not mean to say that we have to
give in to the moment, or throw up our hands, or “take a Trumper to
lunch,” which is how I see the recent spate of “we must
understand the white working class” punditry. MLK might not have
hated the white trooper, or the racist governor, but he certainly
opposed them. And so must we – oppose Trump, and Trumpism, with
every fiber of our being and with every means at our disposal.
(Exactly how we are to do this is a topic for another column.)
In
some settings I've taken to talking about the mission of KIFA being
"reclaiming the moral voice." What I mean is this: we've
allowed the right wing to completely highjack moral language to
society's (and the left's) loss, as they use their personal
religiosity to implement cruel goals. We've seen this repeatedly in
Kansas. This election has shown the bankruptcy of the right's moral
vision, as they overwhelmingly voted for a man who basically
personally represents the opposite of everything they always claimed
to stand for. Their moral bankruptcy, never well hidden, has never
been clearer than it is right now. So there's more clearly a place
for the values that KIFA represents – the values of compassion,
acceptance, solidarity, yes, even love – to make a comeback, if we
can articulate them successfully, which is KIFA's and my role.
So
you see, I'm not afraid of using “us/them” language. What I'm
warning about is generating our action from a place of hatred, for
three reasons:
First,
it lowers us to their level. This can be seen when the line of psalm
(109:9-9: “Let his
days be few; Let another take his office. Let
his children be fatherless, And his wife a widow”) that we
vociferously (and rightly) condemned when it was directed against
Obama, is now used by liberals against Trump.
Second,
anger and hatred simply are not effective bases for discerning and
embarking on effective action. If you don't believe me think about
the times you've reacted in your personal relationships based on
anger, and let me know how well that worked out.
And
third...
You know
that here in Kansas we have this little group of fanatics called the
Westboro Baptist Church. They are extremely provocative and hurtful
but not physically threatening. I figured out long ago that the best
thing to do is to ignore them, although sometimes I still give them
the finger as I drive by.
The only
worthwhile counterprotest to WBC I've ever seen was done by the
students at Shawnee Mission East high school in 2009. They dressed in
colorful clothes, carried signs saying things like, “God is love”,
and the message – and the pictures - were just great. It was
hopeful, it was loving, it was positive, it was colorful –
everything the WBC is not.
And I
believe that's the approach we need to take now. Rather than getting
into our bunkers, imitating the other side's hatred, we need to “be
the change we want to see in the world” - live out loud, every day,
in every possible way, the positive, life-affirming values that we
claim to care about.
It's
better for us emotionally, it's better for us spiritually – and
it's better for us politically. If you look at the issue of same-sex
marriage over the past 15 years, we had implacable opposition,
followed by a rapid change in public opinion. We have to keep open
the possibility that some significant percentage of the people who
voted for Trump can be made to understand our values if we take the
time to articulate them, carefully, and (as much as possible) without
hatred or anger.
And
what's more likely to bring the country back in our direction –
going to the mattresses with Trumpers on their hateful terms, or
continuing our work of building a beloved community, one that is
motivated by the values we hold most dear – acceptance, diversity,
compassion, love? And how can we argue for these values when we are
modeling their opposites?
The WBC
wants people to react to their provocations, to sink to their levels.
So do the alt-righters and other Trumpists, and so does Trump
himself. But doing so is not effective resistance. It removes from us
the one advantage we have, the one we must never give up – our
humanity.
So
oppose, yes – every day and in every way. But anger, hatred? No
thanks.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteLove this.
ReplyDelete