Is Progress Possible? Mindfulness vs Tribalism

Another title for this blog post and video discussion might be: "driving progress wisely." Or "a mindful approach to progress." 

In the video, Robert Wright, author of Why Buddhism is True: The Science and Philosophy of Meditation and Enlightenment (2018) speaks with Emma Varvaloucas, Executive Director of The Progress Network* about tribalism and politics in today's exceptionally divisive and social media driven world.

A factor that they discuss, and Wright has covered in the past, is the way that we often fall into counter-productive extremism, even when we think we're on "the right side" of history on matters. An example Wright gives is of recent protests when some police were filmed driving their cars into protesters. This is not at all typical behavior, but many on the left commented as if it was. 

On the other side of the political divide, he noted, other people saw the isolated cases of rioting and looting and responded as if this was the typical behavior of Black Lives Matter protesters and allies. It wasn't.

So on both sides (and this is not to suggest that the two sides are equal) we can see cases of taking the extremes as if they were the norm. 

This might have the power to enrage and rally allies, but it also twists truth. 

Many on either extreme don't see this. And if they do, they might argue that twisting the truth is necessary and beneficial.

And yet this itself comes around to harm the cause, as people on the other side can often discuss and see the "lies" being put out. So we can end up scoring an "own goal" in which our over-inflated rhetoric or excessive reaction to wrongs actually causes more harm.

The Solution

A little mindfulness and compassion. Even as we work within our tribe or group, and fight for a world that helps people we identify and empathize with, we need to try to think about the lives and reasons of those on the "other side." 

For us as Progressives, that means thinking about and appealing to the ardent further-left activists we know as well as good-hearted centrists and conservatives. In the Buddhist world it means empathizing with those at the cutting edge of new ways of understanding and practicing the Dharma as well as those who place highest value on the oldest teachings and institutions.

And that takes real work. Often we can find our greatest frustration is with those who are closest to us on the political spectrum but who are just either a) twisting things a bit too far, or b) failing to connect with us and see a problem we're pointing at. 

Back when I studied the Pali language, I remember noting that the Buddha used a few words that essentially mean "stupid" and "idiot" to describe people around him surprisingly often. It wasn't just the Brahmins or members of other religious groups that he was talking about. It was often his own near and dear monks and nuns (well, mostly just monks that I can remember). 

The point is, the Buddha offered criticism to anyone who acted or spoke against the truth, be they a close disciple or a distant teacher. And he offered kind words to those who spoke and acted in manners aligned with truth, be they members of his community or not. 

One way I have seen this helpfully manifested in discussions has been in the use of the phrase "both/and." It typically is valuable when a poster or commenter writes that "X is bad, an alternative of X is good." For instance, "our government is bad, anarchy is good." We might say, "what about both a system that preserves helpful things about our government like environmental protections or worker's rights and greater avenues of freedom and self-expression as well as local governance?"

Again, this is by no means easy. And convincing people of things on the internet, people you likely don't know and might never meet is often a lost cause. Nonetheless we are here. Let us make the best of our time in this space.

* Emma also interviewed me way back in my previous life as a famous Buddhist blogger and hers as an editor for Tricycle Magazine. 

An Ordinary Being

Lately, I've been perusing some Buddhist books I have already read. Most interesting are the ones I read before I really understood anything about Buddhism in terms of how it relates to life practice. Currently, I'm looking at a little book called The Four Noble Truths by the Dalai Lama. 

I remember this being the first book that helped me understand the core practical tenets of Buddhism, in contrast to regional-cultural flavors of Buddhism or the theoretical-philosophical "World Religions 101" notion of what Buddhism is. It's compact, but thorough and it was way above me the first time I read it. 

Now I understand more, but how far have I really come? In his chapter "The Truth of Suffering", His Holiness illuminates three "realms of suffering". The closer to enlightenment one is, the more formless one becomes and one becomes an Arya being.

In his words, "Anyone who has gained direct intuitive realization of emptiness, or the ultimate nature of reality, is said to be an Arya according to Mahayana and anyone who had not gained that realization is called an ordinary being."

Ordinary, huh? I guess so. In spite my reading and my earnest attempt to apply a Buddhist mindset to my daily life I can't say that I have ever had "direct intuitive realization of emptiness." I get it at an intellectual level. I can see the logic of it, so to speak, but I haven't truly experienced it.

And that makes me ordinary.

At first I was taken aback by the term. It seemed pejorative to me. Now that I've thought about it though. It seems kind of cozy. To be ordinary implies that a person has many people around them who are thinking about and going through the same thing. There is a solidarity in "ordinary" that peels away as a person achieves Arya.

I've suddenly got this image of all of us ordinary beings kind of scrabbling around, doing the work, having the vision. Then every so often one of us pops up like the bubbles in boiling water and poof. At that level, it's not really relevant whether you are the water or the resulting steam.

How do we Change?

All change comes from within. I think the easiest way to change the reality around us is to change ourself. The words we may speak when talking with someone can mean something completely different to someone else. I think this is why talking, with someone, about religion or politics can be difficult. Instead, maybe we can try talking about the issues that we face.

I feel that it is impossible to change the world around us, with words, actions, or thoughts. However, I think that the reality we see everyday, is a mirror reflection of our mind. That is why, we should invest, and believe, in ourselves first and foremost. I think that this is also why, helping others, also helps ourself. I have asked the archangels to help me understand more clearly, and I feel that I am. I have asked the archangels to help me see and understand the universe more clearly, and I feel that I do.

The meaning of words is a matter of perspective. I think that each of us assign the meaning of words based upon our experiences in life. We all have a different path up the same mountain. So what any given word means will vary from person to person. I think this is why what I hear from what a person is saying, can be different from what they think they are saying. I think that this is also why people can get in trouble when talking about religion, and politics.

However, I feel that a fundamental problem with our government today is a mirror reflection of a fundamental problem within us all. I feel that the problem is a desire to let someone else solve our problems for us. I feel that many of us might intentionally avoid becoming involved with the government, and our local community because of a number of fears. I think that many of us let our fears control us, far more than us controlling our fear. Maybe it is a fear of conflict, a fear of wasting time, or maybe a fear of success even. So we end up not taking responsibility for our own lives. We elect representatives to public office and expect them to do what we are affraid to do. I hope that we can now see how that can be ludicrous. The only way we can change anything is by changing ourselves first.

I feel that this problem, of fear, can be characterized by the saying" "Don't talk about religon or politics". I think our country was founded in the bath houses, of their time, by talking about religon and politics. I feel that they understood that it can be a lot easier to talk about religion and politics if you stick to the issues that they all faced. I think I have found that the vast majority of people agree on the answers to any given issue. Yet, when someone brings up a political party, country, politician, or a particular religion others will inevitably get defensive and emotional. I think of myself as a Libertarian; And, I have found that a lot of people who call themselves Democrats and Republicans agree with me on most issues. I also have found that most people are calm and reasonable when talking about the issues. I have experienced people getting emotional and unreasonable, only, whenever someone mentions a name. So I think maybe we should talk about whatever is on our minds even if it can be classified as religon or politics, and just remember to avoid talking about any particular poltician, political party, or a specific religion.