EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Corporate Win: Supreme Court Says Monsanto Has 'Control Over Product of Life'
- Cornel West: Obama 'Is a War Criminal'
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Disaster Capitalism Strikes as Hedge Funds Circle Near-Bankrupt Municipalities Like Vultures
- Ignoring Bee Crisis, EPA Greenlights New 'Highly Toxic' Pesticide
Popular content
Today's Top News
Can We All Get Along?
The cauldron of hatred and anguish bubbles over like oil slowly seeping into fragile marshlands. The ravages of perpetual warfare rend the fabric of society and sow the seeds of mass insanity. Racism forms a patina over our relations as four centuries of unspeakable atrocities are elided from our master narrative. Politicians prattle, pundits pander, and plutocrats prosper while families grieve and rifts widen. The clock ticks mercilessly and no one seems the wiser.
Where exactly does one cast their gaze anymore to find shelter from the storm? War, conflict, and violence permeate every aspect of modern existence - from our oil-soaked daily lives to the harsh inevitabilities of geopolitics. States legalize racial profiling and ethnic subordination, creating a climate of fear and antipathy. The environment is everywhere a casualty of war, yet the people who orchestrate its devastation are immunized from rebuke while those challenging their impunity are treated as de facto terrorists. And still, we can't even legally limit the most outlandish firearms in our midst.
It is tempting to do what we oftentimes do to cope with this nightmare posing as "reality," namely to take a piece of it and analyze it in-depth with the intention of promoting awareness and suggesting avenues for change. But the cycle churns out more episodes than one can keep up with, forcing us to become something like societal coroners cataloguing individual causes of death as genocide continues unabated. We work at the level of symptoms while the essence of root causation eludes us time and again.
No more. We cannot afford to continue in this manner for another second - our very existence is in peril, and I would rather risk ridicule than court complicity. Not too long ago, in a situation reminiscent of the despair now felt in Oakland and elsewhere, an ordinary person spoke an extraordinary truth in plain and plaintive words:
"People, I just want to say, you know, can we all get along? Can we get along? Can we stop making it, making it horrible for the older people and the kids? ... It's just not right. It's not right. It's not, it's not going to change anything. We'll, we'll get our justice.... Please, we can get along here. We all can get along. I mean, we're all stuck here for a while. Let's try to work it out. Let's try to beat it. Let's try to beat it. Let's try to work it out."
On the streets of America, yet again, a young life is extinguished by the arm of the state, a person of color perishes at the hands of a white oppressor, a martyr is created and justice is barely upheld. In the killing of Oscar Grant by officer Johannes Mehserle, we witness a microcosm of the entire paradigm on which the pervasive violence of our lives rests. Grant, a black fast-food worker with a high-school equivalency and a rap sheet, father of a four-year-old daughter; Mehserle, a white police officer with educational opportunities and a spotless record, father of a child born on the day after the shooting. Grant, a victim even before that fateful morn of January 1, 2009, and Mehserle, groomed for the role of oppressor - their destinies now linked forever.
How many racialized episodes were both Grant and Mehserle exposed to before their encounter? How deep was the well of mutual fear and suspicion of the other in both their minds and hearts? They were strangers, and yet knew each other as stereotypes and caricatures. Mehserle, vested with the legal monopoly of violence by the state and trained in how to deploy it, goes from golden boy to judge, jury, and executioner in a matter of seconds that he will relive for the rest of his days; Grant, used to violence being done to him and responding accordingly, reacts to the deadly blow with almost emphatic resignation: "You shot me! I got a four-year-old daughter!" Mehserle recoils in shock, hands on his head, repeating "Oh my god!" over and over again. All as if each one had been trained for this moment, with lines delivered precisely on cue.
What kind of a world creates a Grant and a Mehserle? Two young men, young fathers, growing up in the same area, separated by skin-deep pigmentation and the baggage of a history that neither asked for nor created. A society that already had adjudicated Grant as a lesser being entitled to only grudging acceptance, while privileging Mehserle with the prospect of power if he will simply agree to play by the rules established for his benefit long ago. A system that uses both as pawns, sets each up to fail, pits one against the other, and diverts our collective gaze from the real culprits who have made violence the baseline feature that binds our lives.
This does not excuse Mehserle's culpability. Each of us has the option to resist our programming and eschew our privilege as best we can - assuming we have the tools to recognize that choice. As callous and shocking as the verdict of "involuntary manslaughter" seems, it might be close to the unfortunate truth of our society. Mehserle almost certainly had no intention of killing Grant in particular, or likely anyone at all, but rather was ingrained with a perspective and cloaked with an authority that should never have existed in the first place. No healthy society ought to ever tolerate the existence of an underclass, nor the appearance of an armed force whose central yet often unseen role is to enforce the boundaries that maintain this caste system. That Mehserle would see Grant as a threat is ironic and perverse, whereas Grant likely understood all too well that the real threat was living in a world that even needed an Officer Mehserle in the first place.
Now Grant is dead and Mehserle probably wishes he was. Outrage in the streets boils over, and the chasm between police officers and community members widens. Meanwhile, the next Grant is being shunted into a life of diminished opportunity, and another Mehserle is being trained in the use of force. How many more must we create before the assembly line itself is dismantled, smashed to unrecognizable pieces, and consigned to the dustbin of history? This is not a case of individual pathology or blood on someone else's hands. We were all in that BART station on New Year's Day 2009; we are all witnesses to the killing; we are all Grant and Mehserle. It is time to own the knowledge that our continuing participation in a world of competition, consumption, categorization, and cruelty renders us all victims and perpetrators at the same time.
A suggestion: there can be no "other," no "lesser," no "expendable" aspect of our shared existence. The separation of reality into convenient classifications such as white/black, humans/nature, or us/them is simply nonsensical. You can scan the great texts from physics to metaphysics, and the essential organizing principle comes out the same: mutual interdependence. A whole with distinct yet interlinked parts, each necessary for the other's existence and none of more importance than any other; no center, no rank, no privileged perspective. In this sense, there can be no war, no despoliation, no hatred that does not come back upon ourselves. We will emerge from our adolescence to embrace this realization, or perish by our own hand - one oil spill, one war, one Mehserle, and one Grant at a time. The news of the day holds up a giant mirror for our edification and potential evolution. Like the man said, "can we all get along?"
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


48 Comments so far
Show AllDr. Amster,
Excellent article. Thank you.
this expresses perfectly a basic teaching of aikido: yorozu no wago, as taught by its founder, morihei ueshiba...:
" there can be no "other," no "lesser," no "expendable" aspect of our shared existence. The separation of reality into convenient classifications such as white/black, humans/nature, or us/them is simply nonsensical. You can scan the great texts from physics to metaphysics, and the essential organizing principle comes out the same: mutual interdependence. A whole with distinct yet interlinked parts, each necessary for the other's existence and none of more importance than any other; no center, no rank, no privileged perspective. In this sense, there can be no war, no despoliation, no hatred that does not come back upon ourselves."
Dr. Amster, you took the words right out of my heart, mind and soul. Thank you for your eloquence.
" You shot me! I got a four-year-old daughter!" Mehserle recoils in shock, hands on his head, repeating "Oh my god!" over and over again . "
nothing spoke to me in this article as deeply as this scene from real life
when both people have realised their common humanity and transcended the roles assigned to them
it shows that in their hearts people are not racist but learn attitudes and behaviours
change is possible
yeah, "change" such as letting Mehserle off with probation because he was such a nice contrite white guy.
Me too, Morticia.
Those two lines were so much more powerful than all the rest. For a moment, I realized that the cop made a mistake and he realized he made a mistake. The words connect with the humanity of the situation. "Oh my God" sounds reasonable, perhaps compassionate, even humble. But consider the situation further.
Mehserle's defense is that he thought he was holding his Taser. However there is a dark side to that defense in that it is an admission that Mehserle intended to shock repeatedly, and for no necessary reason, the handcuffed man he was sitting on. Another way to put it is that Mehserle intended to torture the guy a bit. Intending to torture the guy sounds a lot like a crime to me, so Mehserle killed the guy in the process of criminally abusing him.
Was the cop shocked that he was killing the father of a 4 year old girl or was he dreading what he had just done to his career and his own future?
So, instead of only torturing Grant with his Taser, he had fired his gun into him and had done so in front of a bunch of people with cell phones. Was he thinking: Oh my God, I am f** *ed.
The people responsible for training and supervising Mehserle are partly responsible for the shooting. Mehserle should not have even been thinking of using his Taser in that situation, his training should preclude that or if still disposed to torture, he should have not been allowed to carry a gun. This is where responsibility spreads to the broader society.
It is sad that in this society, black boys are in effect born with a target painted on them. The jury verdict of "involuntary" manslaughter says to me that change isn't happing yet.
Morticia, I don't mean to challenge the validity of your optimistic and heartfelt interpretation of Mehserle's reported response. It MIGHT be a moment of "negepiphany", i.e. a flash of dark, even damning, insight occurring a minute too late.
Mehserle's apparent shock and ambiguous cries may reveal some residual redeeming humanity, but IMO it's reading too much into them to claim that they're a realization of "common humanity".
Keep a good thought; I'm just saying that it ain't necessarily so. Sometimes "Oh my god!" just means "Woe is me!"
Monica, I like your optimism, but have to agree with the other posters who have replied -- it is terrible, poignant, wonderful, that Grant's last words were about his daughter -- but Mehserle wasn't cradling he boy's body, saying, "I'm so sorry, man--" his actions weren't those of compassion and empathy -- he was suddenly discovering how his own life could change in a split second, with no do-overs.
He does have to live with it, forever. And if I were sentencing him, it would be to a life of service to poor urban communities. And not the kind of public sevice that means carrying a gun -- or a Taser -- but one in which soup kitchens and homeless shelters and rape victims and brutalized children loom large. Living with his family among the poorest of the poor. After a lifetime of true (may I say, Christian) service, he may be able to forgive himself. And maybe some good would come from Grant's death. As it is, it's all kabuki theater -- manslaughter, yes -- involuntary? He certainly meant to do the boy harm. Rookie mistake? Then maybe rookies shouldn't carry firearms at all. It would certainly make them more respectful of the vagaries of fate and more understanding of the feeling of powerlessness in those they approach, whether to aid or arrest.
Change IS possible. But evolution takes a long, long time. As a species we're just beginning to look beyond the "us and them" meme, and it's possible that bigoted freaks may yet win the heart & soul of this country. We see and hear them every day, every day, on talk radio & fox "news" and in the coffeeshops and on the street. They barely bother to lower their voices anymore. We must all be careful. And we must never stop fighting for justice. This is what the article doesn't address. How can we come together, when the complacent and disingenuous have no respect for "the other," and the compassionate and ethos-centered believe that love is all you need?
I wish there was an answer. Anyone?
hmm
food for thought
maybe we all project our inner thoughts and feelings into such open statements
but none of us can read their minds
and to misfit, I'm not so silly nor naive as to believe love is all you need
too old for that, seen too much, fought too much misery and injustice
power is what is needed
Sometimes there is poetry in scrutinizing injustice.
Can we all get along? Every rapist, every murderer, every thief of sustenance from the hand of the starving...would approve. The "equality" of the oppressor and the oppressed, the attacker and the attacked, the murderer and the victim, is spurious.
To answer the question posed by the article: No, not without justice.
---------------------------------
I would rather vote for what I want and not get it, than vote for what I don't want and get that. -- Eugene V. Debs
The way of thinking you describe causes the same problems it professes to oppose. It is overwhelmingly true that people who abuse others have been abused - at many levels. "Equality" is not the issue, or the claim. Reality is.
Dan Nissenbaum
Dr. Amster, quoted Rodney King, and called him "an ordinary man." Perhaps so, but I find Rodney King to be anything but ordinary. Amster also failed to acknowledge King by name. That is a disturbing lack of respect in an otherwise thoughtful article.
Thanks for an excellent article Randall. Written from and to the heart.
We have to teach our children to be tolerant. We have to teach them that greed is the ultimate sin. We have to educate our children that it is possible to get along, to share, to be equitable. We have to teach them in our schools, and by example. Until we do that, there is no way that we can get along. Humans have the ability to pass things down from generation to generation. We have the ability to teach our children how to act, to give them values that will further the species and the earth that the species has the privilege of living on and being nurtured by. Until we can do this, we are a failed species, and our life on the earth will be relatively short.
As it is, we teach our children that the life is competition, struggle, the survival of the fittest. This is such an outrageous misrepresentation of the science of evolution that it should be called propaganda, not science. This is such a total negation of the wisdom of all major religious founders that it would be wise to discover where it comes from.
It would behoove us to discovers who benefits from this idiocy. Then we could get rid of those who benefit from this sick and insane propaganda. I doubt if they could be 'educated' out of their greed into sanity. There have been attempts, but they have been failures. Personally, I believe that they will have to have power taken from them by force, and very likely be eradicated. The Insanity of greed is a disease that is easily spread. If there is a better way to deal with it, I'm all for it. I know that the first 'Jesus followers' had an answer: share the wealth. They thought that the world would end during their lifetime and that 'Jesus' would return to rule a just world. This didn't happen and in three centuries Christianity replaced paganism as the religion of Imperial Rome. It took even less time for the followers of Muhammad to become conquerors.
The only societies that measure up in any way to the ideal of 'getting along' are tribal ones. Tribes are not perfect, nothing is, but if they last for thousands of years they are based on cooperation rather than competition. They teach their children to get along, at least within the tribe. It doesn't happen by accident. We are used to believing that 'civilizations' are the pinnacle of human development. I believe this is totally wrong. Tribal society is the form that human culture has to evolve into in order to realize its potential as a species. 'Civilization' is an aberration.
Today, more than ever in America, the old truism " May your tribe prosper " should be pointed to, in community after community. Most, almost all of my community, share nothing with Wall Street or Washington, D.C. elites. We seem them impeding real community, actually. This article was good and your post was even better. Thanks.
Thanks to Randall and George for excellent expressions of the truth about what we are and how we can understand and justify our existence. We should envision ourselves as global citizens with common social responsibilities to every other person in the world rather than only citizens of the American Empire. Then we could all work for social rules for the betterment of everyone, everywhere with peace and justice for all. We must put people and living creatures over greed and the profits of profligate capitalism.
Tom Turnipseed
As it is, we teach our children that the life is competition, struggle, the survival of the fittest. This is such an outrageous misrepresentation of the science of evolution that it should be called propaganda, not science. This is such a total negation of the wisdom of all major religious founders that it would be wise to discover where it comes from.
--------------------------------------
It comes from psychopaths, George. It's their credo. They are the world's apex predator, and they need to hide their pathology and make it seem normal. They're like the vampires of legend. They hid, and hide, their pathology by making all-against-all competition the price of life for everyone.
I still think greed is the root cause. It causes a lust for money and power, much like the vampire's lust for blood. I think the myth of the vampire may be based on what greed does to people. These people most often have the means to an excellent education where they pick up exquisite manners. They can be very charming, especially to their own class, or they can 'kiss babies', if they are politicians. But they can be cold blooded killers if necessary. Of course, there is a class of professional assassins to do their dirty work for them. And if a bunch of people are in the way of making more money or gaining more power, they can write them off without a qualm. Someday someone should do a study on the 'pathology of the rich'.
There are always going to be different levels of wealth, and that's probably as it should be. If you work hard and are skilled or talented, you should have more than someone who chooses to do little or is able to contribute only the average to society. But no one should starve or be homeless no matter how lazy, and no one should have so much wealth that they can never begin to spend it on their own well being. It's not too much to ask for one family to have one house, or that a person has to use public transportation instead of having his own fleet of jets. This is outrageous, it is insane. Someone has to curtail this madness. If that means the government, so be it. That's why I'm a socialist.
No.
The purpose of religion is to divide us, a luxury we can no longer afford.
"Life is good. What an experience! It's always best to forgive."
You keep saying that, but you complain a lot. If life is so good, why do you complain so much?
So if the 'European' way is so bad why do you have/use a computer? Why not communicate using smoke signals? Or heliograph? Perhaps they just aren't as good at nuance. Why not just drop off the grid and live the 'good' life you seem to revere without european technology?
"Those are only a few stories from my life but I have stories from my life you have no idea about at all."
All of us have such stories, my friend, not just you. You are no more a special creation than the rest of us. Or do you think you are?
But let me ask you this: DO you think that whichever people was here first have eternal sovereignty over the land? That seems to be your claim.
In a country where even progressives and liberals are divided and without realization fall for the conservatives' YOYO (You're on your own) ideology of shunning collective thinking and calling team work a "dictatorship", war amongst everyone is harder to escape. Getting along only becomes possible when more people actually unite, share ideas, and think and act together in addition to individually.
We can't 'all get along' in a society where we're all competing with each other for finite resources.
End of story.
Did you mean to say "scarce". They're finite, of course, but still enough for all. It's the artificial scarcity -imposed by the elites- that's the problem, isn't it?
"Can We All Get Along?"
No -- not all, but probably 95% of us. The other 5% (more or less -- not really a statistic) who are sociopaths (authoritarian social dominators, greedy, and very good at lying and conning people) stop that from happening as long as a sizable portion of the people are taken in by them, believing in them and their lies, instead of recognizing them for what they are and dealing with them humanely but effectively. Some of that portion are seemingly predisposed (either genetically or from conditioning) to be authoritarian personalities and willing followers of the social dominators. This results in a society where such madness is supported -- even rewarded.
what an astounding article............
hopefully it will be read by people who practice racism.......
"What kind of a world creates a Grant and a Mehserle?"
The author is echoing a familiar psych-op that suggests that nobody knows the answer so everyone must run and buy his book.
If the author truly cared about the people's welfare he would answer his own question with the truth: A world of institutionalized class warfare where public policies support the parasitic elite at the expense of the people. To blacks, white cops represent the interests of 19th century slave owners, and their modern counterparts, naturally.
Cops are typically unaware of the class war raging under their noses because the term isn't defined in their law enforcement glossaries. If you know a cop, ask him/her what it feels like to wear mandatory blinders, without even permission to inquire about them or the evil agenda they hide.
Isn't the entire article answering the question by talking about class war? What am I missing?
Dan Nissenbaum
And yet. Here is a silly vision.
Rodney King has traveled backwards in Time and he is standing - alarm written upon his face - wet up to his chest, in in some hypothetical Primordial Sea. This sea is frantic with frothing and roiling water - - for it is the very nursery of LIFE on EARTH. This is where it all began.
A unknown and unfathomable source or force has determined that the mediator of Life will be Self Replicating Molecules. To be one of the molecules successful at self replication, it must locate, glom on to, and assemble building blocks of GTAC - guanine, thymine, adenine, and cytosine - or fail and be disassembled for parts by other tougher or hardier molecules. Rodney King detects the frenzy and competition around him and hollers out: "Can't we all, just, get along?".
Boom. Self Replicating Molecules figure out the benefit of =cooperation= by linking together to form skeins, or nets which can filter the Primoridal Sea for free floating units of GTAC. Rapidly this becomes the principal form of SRMs which Rodney feels bumping into his legs, and he yells out: "Can't we all, just, get along?".
After bumping into Rodney an edge of one skein drifts across and BOOM links with an opposite skein edge. Voila!! Somehow this skein has become a hollow TUBE. Sea water can be filtered much better for GTAC by passing passively through the tube. BUT - WOW - CAN YOU DIG THIS- sea water can be sucked in and pushed through the tube if parts of the skein take turns contracting in WAVES (peristalsis). And the tubes leap vigorously into action to glom onto GCAT and Rodney calls out: "Can't we all, just, get along?".
The dominant form of life on earth becomes TUBE CREATURES. Nature chooses front and back ends of the tube, In and Out. Sensors such as eyes evolve at the Ingress. The tube body is soon propelled by attachments like arms and legs and wings and flagellating tails. By now there are no more free GCAT and the inside of the tube has to evolve factories to dismantle (digest) creatures and things composed of GCAT, then tube creatures need to evolve debris scavengerss and evolve assholes that pucker after expelling debris into the sea. This enterprise is all very ticklish and Rodney King calls out: "Can't we all, just, get along?".
The evolutionary process described in four short paragraphs took a few billion years. Near the IN part of the tube evolved neural tissue and eventually evolved brains. Like a child tends to think History began on his her birthday, species tend to act as if History began with their evolution.
Dinosaurs, who failed entirely to "all just get along" ruled the earth more than 250 million years. And they achieved this without a Burger King or imagining a dinosaur heaven to which "good" dinosaurs went when they unfairly died.
Dr. Amster's eloquence resembles that of anthropologist Robert Ardrey, all of whose books I've purchased at used book stores. If Ardrey were alive today, I believe he would simply say: "Our species is up past its bedtime."
TRYLON
I have to say I found this article to be rather shallow and presumptuous, with a likelihood of steering folks to conditioned helplessness.
Reminds me of an old school teacher who wondered aloud the very same thing as to why the students in her class would get restless and uppity during the last weeks of school as we sat on wooden chairs in straight lines with no A/C staring out at the sunny day that teased us out the window as teach droned on.
Once outside all hell would break loose on these hot days as we combusted from being packed like rats in the school maze enduring countless hours of indoctrination.
Until Amster learns to define "we" and can write with critical thinking about social conditions that bring about causes he is irrelevant.
"It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness."
-Karl Marx's 1859 Preface to the Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy
Excellent article, Mr. Amster.
While this is a well written and heartfelt article, ......
Ironic that I would read a post by Dr. Amster just as I arrived back from Amsterdam. (No I didn't inhale:)) After reading such a well written work, my first thought took me back to a quote that I read many years ago when President M. Gorbachev said at a world conference on population control in San Francisco: "Unless we get the world's great religions to work together we will fail." Therefore, my question is, if Dr. Amster, with his outstanding writing skills, can't reach the world's great religions, is there any hope that we will ever "get along?" One of my old professor used a method of solving problems by working backwards, such as: "What do we want the outcome to be?" And he spent great amounts of time writing on the board for weeks getting everyones ideas of how to reach the outcome. Somehow the entire class always ended up happy that they came together to reach the outcome they wanted to achieve. Keep writing Dr. Amster, you are trying!!!
Unless we get the world's great religions to work together we will fail." Therefore, my question is, if Dr. Amster, with his outstanding writing skills, can't reach the world's great religions, is there any hope that we will ever "get along?"
----------------------------------
The way to get the One True Religion nutcases to work together is to take their Biggest Chunks aside, individually, and tell them that unless they get with the program immediately, they will find out sooner than they'd like whether God exists. And then, since they don't really believe that God exists either, one of them, in the fullness of his arrogance, will decide that the message is a bluff. After proving it's not a bluff, go back to the survivors and repeat the message. I
doubt it would take more than the one example, or possibly two.
You have hit the nail on the head. We sometimes call it “connecting the dots”. Working backward sounds like a great idea. People have to be made to understand where it is that these policies come from and why.
Maybe a good place to start is better trained police.
Police are trained to be confrontational enforces of the law. Maybe it would be more appropriate to teach them to be peace keeper within a community in which they live.
The cops should not be trained to be overlords, but equal members. Of course, maybe people should see the difficult job that cops have, and not give them grief for doing their job, either.
The simple answer to all the worlds ills is "LOVE". Total, unconditional "LOVE".
We will reach critical mass soon. 51% is all we need to tip the scales. Compassion not competition, is the answer.
B.T.W. Please vote for me as Secretary of State, I make outrageous chocolate chip cookies/ice cold milk!!!!! ;) And YOU ARE invited to join us.
(The 100th Monkey by Ken Keyes Jr.)
P/S Even though "The 100th Monkey"is a myth, Loving unconditionally couldn't hurt. ;)
Loving unconditionally couldn't hurt.
--------------------------------
Of course it can. Read some game theory.
Loving or even tolerating a psychopath is *guaranteed* to be a mistake, sometimes the final mistake.