Faith, Trust, and Pixie Dust
This entry, edited as you see below, was included in my 2013 Sophie Kerr Prize portfolio which earned finalist status.
According to Peter Pan, those are the things you need in order to fly. I’m starting to think that these might be what we need in the realm of politics. And I’m not even joking.
Maybe you’ve heard about the National Defense Authorization Act, which Obama just signed, but maybe not, because many outlets (aside from the alarmists on social media) aren’t covering it. Before you go Googling it (which you can totally do, but I warn you it will terrify you for various reasons), I want to link you to a few things I found very helpful when making sense of all of it, the first being the actual text of the law. That’s the Senate version, which was slightly modified in the conference version, but the main provisions I’m talking about here, Sections 1031 and 1032 (which became 1021 in the final version) are the same. These are the parts dealing with the detention of those suspected of terrorism or terrorist-related activities, possibly-- but not with any guarantee-- with no trial.
I leave you to draw your own conclusions about it. Regardless, Obama has said his administration won’t interpret Section 1021 as applying to American citizens. And again, I’ll leave you to decide whether to believe him or not.
And that’s entirely my point here. Asking if you believe what the president says is just asking if you trust him and his word. There are a large number of people who blatantly don’t trust the President, whether it’s about this or about where he was born.
This is a major reason that partisanship is such a huge problem. Not only does it clog up Congress and stall the lawmaking process, not only does it cause the vitriolic, uncivil speech that characterizes political “discourse” nowadays, it contributes to a lack of trust. In fact, I’d be willing to bet lack of trust causes those other two things, and more besides. Partisanship creates an us-versus-them dynamic, which easily leads to an ingroup/outgroup setting. Psychology tells us that people trust the other members of their group and distrust members of other groups- sound familiar?
So, here, for instance, Republicans are calling Obama a traitor (I’m not kidding), fascist, socialist etc. and ignoring his signing statement. They don’t trust him to abide by it anyway. They also don’t trust that he and other Democrats in power actually have the best interests of the American people at heart when they make decisions.
Democrats do it, too. How often do we see on comments and forums that “Republicans don’t care about you only their corporate donors?” I can’t even read these sections on any news or politics-related site anymore, it’s gotten so bad.
As for me, I don’t think NDAA dismantles the Bill of Rights. It says “Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing laws or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens...” and I’m inclined to believe it. I’m also inclined to believe Obama when he says he’ll hold to the Bill of rights in interpreting this law. And I trust the court system to rule the provision unconstitutional should a challenge arise.
This is pretty rare, I know. No one trusts the courts, or Congress. And they certainly do things that call that trust into question: Citizens United- seriously, SCOTUS? Seriously?- the fact that Congress pork-barrels stuff, which makes it seem like they’re trying to hide things; the amendment to NDAA to state more explicitly that its detainment procedures don’t apply to US citizens, that Congress voted against. Let that sink in for a second. However, I do believe that our Constitution is a singularly amazing document, and the form of government it sets up is the best in the world. So I have faith that it will uphold itself- I really do think it can do that- and protect us.
Maybe I’m naive. But I don’t see how I can operate in the world and not believe the best of people, including elected officials. I’ve met some of them and they’ve seemed honest and likable for the most part. I also have faith that the people aren’t fooled as easily as some seem to think, and if someone truly was trying to undermine the country from the inside they’d be found out. I cannot function under any other assumption.
I think that if more people would trust each other-- trust that the shopkeeper isn’t out to rip you off, the customer service representative isn’t being purposefully unhelpful, that the people in government aren’t without fail corrupt and ego-centric-- things could be better. I think members of Congress would be more willing to cooperate with their counterparts on the other side if they trusted that he or she wanted the same thing they did: what is best for the American people. Maybe they have a different view of the way to achieve that goal, but if they looked at the overall goal first I think they would be more amenable to compromise.
What I don’t know, though, is how to achieve this. Maybe if the people give this trust to the elected officials, they will rise to the occasion and show they deserve it. (I actually think that this is the best strategy for the other, smaller instances of distrust in our everyday lives.) A Republican trusting a Democrat to have noble intentions might make said Democrat more likely to articulate those intentions, knowing he would be believed. But maybe that wouldn’t work. Likely, the level of distrust is so high no one would even bother to try.
I guess this is where the pixie dust comes in. Because sometimes I really do think it would take an act of God, a supernatural force, to get people to have that trust and goodwill again. Especially in relation to government, and within it. I don’t like to end on a depressing note on these posts, but I honestly don’t know how else. I want the nation to be able to fly, to soar, but if we’re missing the faith and trust, and many people the happy thoughts Peter also mentions, then I think pixie dust might be the only way to reach the morning.
According to Peter Pan, those are the things you need in order to fly. I’m starting to think that these might be what we need in the realm of politics. And I’m not even joking.
Maybe you’ve heard about the National Defense Authorization Act, which Obama just signed, but maybe not, because many outlets (aside from the alarmists on social media) aren’t covering it. Before you go Googling it (which you can totally do, but I warn you it will terrify you for various reasons), I want to link you to a few things I found very helpful when making sense of all of it, the first being the actual text of the law. That’s the Senate version, which was slightly modified in the conference version, but the main provisions I’m talking about here, Sections 1031 and 1032 (which became 1021 in the final version) are the same. These are the parts dealing with the detention of those suspected of terrorism or terrorist-related activities, possibly-- but not with any guarantee-- with no trial.
I leave you to draw your own conclusions about it. Regardless, Obama has said his administration won’t interpret Section 1021 as applying to American citizens. And again, I’ll leave you to decide whether to believe him or not.
And that’s entirely my point here. Asking if you believe what the president says is just asking if you trust him and his word. There are a large number of people who blatantly don’t trust the President, whether it’s about this or about where he was born.
This is a major reason that partisanship is such a huge problem. Not only does it clog up Congress and stall the lawmaking process, not only does it cause the vitriolic, uncivil speech that characterizes political “discourse” nowadays, it contributes to a lack of trust. In fact, I’d be willing to bet lack of trust causes those other two things, and more besides. Partisanship creates an us-versus-them dynamic, which easily leads to an ingroup/outgroup setting. Psychology tells us that people trust the other members of their group and distrust members of other groups- sound familiar?
So, here, for instance, Republicans are calling Obama a traitor (I’m not kidding), fascist, socialist etc. and ignoring his signing statement. They don’t trust him to abide by it anyway. They also don’t trust that he and other Democrats in power actually have the best interests of the American people at heart when they make decisions.
Democrats do it, too. How often do we see on comments and forums that “Republicans don’t care about you only their corporate donors?” I can’t even read these sections on any news or politics-related site anymore, it’s gotten so bad.
As for me, I don’t think NDAA dismantles the Bill of Rights. It says “Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing laws or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens...” and I’m inclined to believe it. I’m also inclined to believe Obama when he says he’ll hold to the Bill of rights in interpreting this law. And I trust the court system to rule the provision unconstitutional should a challenge arise.
This is pretty rare, I know. No one trusts the courts, or Congress. And they certainly do things that call that trust into question: Citizens United- seriously, SCOTUS? Seriously?- the fact that Congress pork-barrels stuff, which makes it seem like they’re trying to hide things; the amendment to NDAA to state more explicitly that its detainment procedures don’t apply to US citizens, that Congress voted against. Let that sink in for a second. However, I do believe that our Constitution is a singularly amazing document, and the form of government it sets up is the best in the world. So I have faith that it will uphold itself- I really do think it can do that- and protect us.
Maybe I’m naive. But I don’t see how I can operate in the world and not believe the best of people, including elected officials. I’ve met some of them and they’ve seemed honest and likable for the most part. I also have faith that the people aren’t fooled as easily as some seem to think, and if someone truly was trying to undermine the country from the inside they’d be found out. I cannot function under any other assumption.
I think that if more people would trust each other-- trust that the shopkeeper isn’t out to rip you off, the customer service representative isn’t being purposefully unhelpful, that the people in government aren’t without fail corrupt and ego-centric-- things could be better. I think members of Congress would be more willing to cooperate with their counterparts on the other side if they trusted that he or she wanted the same thing they did: what is best for the American people. Maybe they have a different view of the way to achieve that goal, but if they looked at the overall goal first I think they would be more amenable to compromise.
What I don’t know, though, is how to achieve this. Maybe if the people give this trust to the elected officials, they will rise to the occasion and show they deserve it. (I actually think that this is the best strategy for the other, smaller instances of distrust in our everyday lives.) A Republican trusting a Democrat to have noble intentions might make said Democrat more likely to articulate those intentions, knowing he would be believed. But maybe that wouldn’t work. Likely, the level of distrust is so high no one would even bother to try.
I guess this is where the pixie dust comes in. Because sometimes I really do think it would take an act of God, a supernatural force, to get people to have that trust and goodwill again. Especially in relation to government, and within it. I don’t like to end on a depressing note on these posts, but I honestly don’t know how else. I want the nation to be able to fly, to soar, but if we’re missing the faith and trust, and many people the happy thoughts Peter also mentions, then I think pixie dust might be the only way to reach the morning.